PDA

View Full Version : Concerns about Paul George



Pacergeek
11-19-2010, 11:15 AM
Any body else have any concerns about Paul George? I know that the season has just began, but I have a few worries.

1. The "deer in the headlights" look that he has. I know that he is only a rookie, but I really can't stand the fact that he just doesn't look comfortable out there. After watching Eric Bledsoe, whom we passed on, Bledsoe blends into the flow of a game and already looks like a veteran. I understand that they play different positions, but I really wish that Paul would look more relaxed and confident.

2. I can't help but make the comparison to Jonathan Bender. The same things were said about Bender like how he has so much "potential", how we need to be "patient" with his development, and how "athletic" he is.

Unclebuck
11-19-2010, 11:17 AM
He's a rookie, get back with me in two years about these concerns

imawhat
11-19-2010, 11:21 AM
He'll be great if he puts his money where his mouth is.

I think we have little to worry about.

IndyPacer
11-19-2010, 11:26 AM
2. I can't help but make the comparison to Jonathan Bender. The same things were said about Bender like how he has so much "potential", how we need to be "patient" with his development, and how "athletic" he is.

Yeah, they are identical situations except for the fact that one had chronic and career ending knee problems and the other is just a young rookie getting adjusted to the pro game after playing 123 minutes in 7 games in his entire pro career. Great comparison. /sarcasm

imawhat
11-19-2010, 11:29 AM
I'm more concerned with Lance, and he'd likely play without the deer in the headlights look.

duke dynamite
11-19-2010, 11:32 AM
Why is anyone worried about PG 10 games into his rookie season?

oxxo
11-19-2010, 11:49 AM
Only thing to be worried about is JOB destroying his confidence.

Point 1. He's a rookie.
Point 2. Bender had injury issues only.

ChicagoJ
11-19-2010, 11:54 AM
My only concern is the idea that he can play "guard". You can tell from looking at him that he's a natural, almost prototype forward. Just let him be.

And the things that he hasn't done well (handle the ball in traffic, defend quicker players) he's probably never going to do well because he's a forward.

He should be learning how to match his "style" into the coach's system (note, no need for editorial comments on the system. I don't like it either), not learning a new position. If you think he's got the deer-in-the-headlights look, that's the reason.

Once he proves he's successfully made the leap from a non-major college program to the NBA, (in other words, in a couple of years), then you can think about having him learn a new position.

cdash
11-19-2010, 11:59 AM
My only concern is the idea that he can play "guard". You can tell from looking at him that he's a natural, almost prototype forward. Just let him be.

That seems to be something of a trend with our organization. We have played Dunleavy out of position since he got here. I understand that wing positions are largely interchangeable, but I think we have taken that to a bit of an extreme. I agree that George is much more of a SF than SG, just as Mike Dunleavy is. On that note, I never liked the idea of Lance Stephenson at the point. I get that he has decent handles, but he is not ever going to be a point guard. That dude is a shooting guard all the way, stop trying to make him into something he isn't.

imawhat
11-19-2010, 11:59 AM
Jay, what is so much more difficult about learning shooting guard as opposed to small forward?

pathil275
11-19-2010, 12:22 PM
I thought the common perception of Paul George was that he is a work in progress with tremendous upside. I don't understand why he is doubted at all, especially with just ten games into the season.

JOB did the benching with Hibbert and Rush in their first seasons as well and I am sure that PG eventually emerges from this situation strengthened. That his confidence isn't sky-high at this point is obvious, but I am not in the least concerned that he'll put it together and become a fundamental piece of this franchise within a couple of years from now.

Hicks
11-19-2010, 12:25 PM
I'm not yet convinced he can't guard 2's. I seem to notice them getting by him the most when he's being picked off or falls asleep. I tend to like what I see when he guards someone in isolation.

thewholefnshow31
11-19-2010, 12:26 PM
So only 10 games into the season and you are freaking out about a rookie?

Not all rookies are going to come in and take the league by storm. George has a lot of learning to do and it will take some time.

Like UB said call me in 2 years and if he is still playing like this then yes it is time to be concerned.

Speed
11-19-2010, 01:27 PM
He just has to think through things right now at this level.

This time next year, it will START to become instinct.

Like Buck said, talk to me in two years.

BillS
11-19-2010, 01:37 PM
JOB gets stronger and stronger. Took him at least a year to ruin Rush and Hibbert, now he is able to ruin Paul George in a training camp + 10 games.

STRONGER THAN DIRT!

:rolleyes:

Day-V
11-19-2010, 01:39 PM
http://capnbob.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/chicken-little.jpg

Trophy
11-19-2010, 01:41 PM
He's still learning and getting used to the Pacers and the NBA.

Give him a few years to be an effective.

I'm looking forward to a future SG rotation of him and Brandon.

pacers74
11-19-2010, 01:59 PM
For right now, as a rookie, I can see why he is getting limited minutes. He is kind of lost on offense. When he got the ball the offense would slow down and he would just stand there a couple of times. One time he just threw the ball into the stands. I think he is thinking to much out there and not just playing wthin the flow of the game.

I am like most everyone else, just give him time. Rush started looking good around Feb. or March of his rookie year. Hopefully George can do that and just be more constitent than Rush has been after that.

Shade
11-19-2010, 02:02 PM
I thought it was already well established before we even drafted George that he is still very raw. He only played a single season of college ball, and not for a high-profile team, either.

Strummer
11-19-2010, 03:06 PM
1. The "deer in the headlights" look that he has. I know that he is only a rookie, but I really can't stand the fact that he just doesn't look comfortable out there. After watching Eric Bledsoe, whom we passed on, Bledsoe blends into the flow of a game and already looks like a veteran. I understand that they play different positions, but I really wish that Paul would look more relaxed and confident.

2. I can't help but make the comparison to Jonathan Bender. The same things were said about Bender like how he has so much "potential", how we need to be "patient" with his development, and how "athletic" he is.


I like the fact that George isn't trying to dominate and take over. That shows humility and a willingness to play team ball. Considering how athletic he obviously is, I think that's a huge positive.

You're giving up on him way to soon. It's only 10 games into his rookie season. So far I've liked everything I've seen from him.

Hicks
11-19-2010, 03:18 PM
I thought it was already well established before we even drafted George that he is still very raw. He only played a single season of college ball, and not for a high-profile team, either.

He played two years, I believe.

What amazes me is that he came into Fresno State as a big man. The fact that he even looks like an NBA small forward, let alone a maybe-sorta-possibly a SG, is remarkable.

pacer4ever
11-19-2010, 03:22 PM
He played two years, I believe.

What amazes me is that he came into Fresno State as a big man. The fact that he even looks like an NBA small forward, let alone a maybe-sorta-possibly a SG, is remarkable.

Ya he was a big man all the way up to his 2nd yr at Fresno. He looks really good for only playing the wing postionfor 1 yr

odeez
11-19-2010, 03:35 PM
No concerns at all... I'll echo previous posts by saying he is just a rookie, his time will come.

ChicagoJ
11-19-2010, 03:44 PM
Jay, what is so much more difficult about learning shooting guard as opposed to small forward?

Its hard to teach quickness. Its hard to teach "being a couple inches shorter". Its hard to teach, "don't be so tall - you're dribbling the ball too high in traffic."

He's too big to play guard. It has nothing to do with "learning", although once he has figured out how to play forward, you could try to figure out if you can play one guard, three forwards and a center. The key is forcing the opponent to go big like that.

One could also argue that we try to play with one guard, three forwards and a center with Dunleavy. One would also argue that Dunleavy is too tall, too long, too slow to really play against the majority of NBA guards. And just because George is quicker than Dunleavy doesn't make him a guard, either. And one could also follow-up that argument by acknowledging that Dunleavy has some great "facilitation" skills that give him a unique advantage at guard. Time will tell if George truly has any great "guard" skills that allow him to play out of position like that.

ChicagoJ
11-19-2010, 03:50 PM
He played two years, I believe.

What amazes me is that he came into Fresno State as a big man. The fact that he even looks like an NBA small forward, let alone a maybe-sorta-possibly a SG, is remarkable.

I didn't say SF, I said F. With a little more bulk (he's only 20, he isn't done growing so he'll get stronger even if he isn't trying to bulk up), I like what he and Danny could be able to bring at the two forward spots. Neither of them are prototype 3's, nor are they prototype 4's. They are just forwards.

If Rush isn't the long-term answer as a starting guard, then we need to find another guard. There will be plenty of minutes available to George to play forward when he's ready for them.

jcouts
11-19-2010, 05:14 PM
everything got skewed the first time someone uttered the words "paul george" and "rookie of the year candidate" in the same sentence.

regardless of what position he gets time at, he will not even be in the same league as the ROY candidates this year.

i could see him, however, being in the running for MIP in a few years...or at the worst serving as a Nick Batum type of player for us.

NapTonius Monk
11-19-2010, 05:24 PM
Games Played: Robert Parish-1611, Jabbar-1560, Stockton-1504, Reggie Miller-1389, Paul George-7. Looks like his career is winding down. He'd darn well better pick it up.

cdash
11-19-2010, 05:27 PM
Ya he was a big man all the way up to his 2nd yr at Fresno. He looks really good for only playing the wing postionfor 1 yr

...really? I did not know that. That concerns me more than anything else.

righteouscool
11-19-2010, 05:32 PM
...really? I did not know that. That concerns me more than anything else.

Why? He looks so smooth with his movement. Not to mention think of how much more he has to learn about that position. It may take him 3-4 years to click, but I don't see how George doesn't turn out at the very least to be a very good defensive player/3 pt shooter.

cdash
11-19-2010, 05:43 PM
Why? He looks so smooth with his movement. Not to mention think of how much more he has to learn about that position. It may take him 3-4 years to click, but I don't see how George doesn't turn out at the very least to be a very good defensive player/3 pt shooter.

Sooo...Brandon Rush?

It only concerns me because it means he's more raw than I thought he was. And it's a very minor concern.

xBulletproof
11-19-2010, 05:46 PM
Sooo...Brandon Rush?

It only concerns me because it means he's more raw than I thought he was. And it's a very minor concern.

That's confusing, honestly. How does that information suddenly mean he's more raw? He's still the same player today that he was yesterday. It doesn't change anything.

IndyPacer
11-19-2010, 06:14 PM
I'd agree that Paul George's best NBA position will probably be SF, but he's much quicker and more athletic than most 6'9" players. I could see him doing just fine playing some minutes at SG eventually (meaning he's obviously not there yet). He's not as quick as your typical NBA guard, but his length could help a bit regarding shooting over smaller defenders in offense and pestering opponents when defending. It helps that he's a decent shooter and a very good athlete. The biggest issues currently are lack of experience and limited ballhandling skills.

The Stephenson as a PG isn't the best comparison regarding playing out of position. The PG position and associated responsibilities are rather unique. I'd also say that Dunleavy isn't just slow and lacking athleticism for SG; he's not either for even a forward. George has more potential for success at SG.

jeffg-body
11-19-2010, 06:16 PM
Really? Worried about a rook after 10 games in his career? IMHO he looks better than Danny did at the same point in his career. The kid is a rook and he will have a lot of growing pains and mental lapses this year.

cdash
11-19-2010, 06:47 PM
That's confusing, honestly. How does that information suddenly mean he's more raw? He's still the same player today that he was yesterday. It doesn't change anything.

I was under the impression he had been a wing in his formative basketball years. I thought his learning curve was strictly that "college to pro" curve, not a "college to pro and major role shift" curve. It doesn't change anything in reality, but it changes my perception of the situation, if that makes sense.

cordobes
11-19-2010, 06:49 PM
I'm not yet convinced he can't guard 2's.

I'm absolutely convinced he can. Except guys like Ray Allen who need to be chased through lots of screens, at least for now.

-----

ChicagoJ, are you expecting Phil Jackson to coach the Pacers in the future? He's the one coach in the league that plays 2-guard fronts systematically (meaning he needs a 2nd guard with an 1-guard type of skill-set).

In most systems, the wings are interchangeable. Why can't you have a wing like Paul paired with another wing like Granger? Rush isn't a good ball-handler either, I suspect Paul George will end up the better player off the bounce between the two. There are many guys like that - Anthony Morrow, Thabo Sefolosha, Wes Johnson, Keith Bogans, DeShaun Stevenson, Landry Fields, Aaron Aflalo, Rasual Butler: they're all starters in NBA teams and Paul George will be a better ball-handler than all of them.

In some teams the 2 is the secondary ball-handler and creator off the bounce after the PG. In some others it's the 3 and the 2 is a guy who plays more off the ball, spotting up and as a cutter. In some teams like the Thunder, the 2 is a defensive minded role-player, a guy who can't create shots and the 3 is the potent weapon; in others like the Rockets it's the opposite. It doesn't really matter, they're all wings. As long as the traits are there - for the team, as a collective - it's irrelevant who brings them. It's just a matter of having the collective ability to defend what other teams throw at you. I like the idea of a 1/2/George/Granger/5 line-up too, but a line-up of PG/ George + Granger / big 1 + big 2 should also be extremely functional.

ChicagoJ
11-20-2010, 12:33 AM
I'm absolutely convinced he can.

You'd really like us to make that mistake, wouldn't you? Every team would. :D

Wings haven't been interechangeable in several years.

PG- SG- SF- PF- C is dead.

G - G - F - F - C has come back after a 25 year absence, because the double-post causes too much congestion with the size and speed of modern players. The second post player is nearly extinct. While I don't like a team to play with two points, two wings, and post (which O'Brien seems to prefer), a point, a "SG", two forwards and post will work just fine.

We need a lot of George and Granger on the court together. With two guards and post. If you want to say that George and Granger are interchangable at the two forwards spots, okay. But don't make George or Granger or Dunleavy defend a smaller, quicker guard.

If we're going to play him at guard, we better play a lot of zone.

BringJackBack
11-20-2010, 12:43 AM
This might sound a little too simple to make sense but hear me out. This is in two years or so when and if Paul George is starting at the two. If the opposing team has a Ray Allen, Reggie Miller, Rip Hamilton, or someone that runs off screens the whole game to get their shots, can't we just put Collison on him at the start of the game and have Rush come in to guard him situationally? As in, have Darren take the responsibilities of guarding the shooting guard while Paul George guards the point guard? It's better than having George chase though screens. I know that the opposing shooting guard can easily shoot over Collison but remember that Collison has good hops and can get out and contest those shots assuming that he is much improved at the defensive side of the court two years from now.


Since Paul has shown some flashes of having good defensive ability on point guards have him switch up on the opposing point guard so that Paul doesn't have to worry so much about off-ball defense. Thoughts?

However, right now that is impossible because Collison does even a worse job than George of fighting through screens. But, he has the ability to improve.

SoupIsGood
11-20-2010, 12:46 AM
If Stephen Jackson of all people can play 2-guard in this league, then Paul George certainly can.

Hicks
11-20-2010, 01:29 AM
But don't make George or Granger or Dunleavy defend a smaller, quicker guard.

If we're going to play him at guard, we better play a lot of zone.

Did you watch Danny guarding Eric Gordon last night? He did a very good job on that smaller, quicker guard. And Paul is quicker than Danny.

I tend to agree the 2nd post is dying, but I don't believe the PG and SG are becoming more similar. It's more like the 2, 3 and 4 are becoming three different sizes of the same thing.

Ozwalt72
11-20-2010, 01:41 AM
Did you watch Danny guarding Eric Gordon last night? He did a very good job on that smaller, quicker guard. And Paul is quicker than Danny.


I tend to agree with your side of things more, but one thing I want to point out is that while Gordon is fairly quick, he relies a LOT on his superior strength. The length and strength of Granger is a better counter than a more quick defender in that particular match-up. Though that doesn't actually take anything away from what Granger managed to do.

HOOPFANATIC
11-20-2010, 03:11 AM
I'm not concerned after the Clipper game. Just anxious to see Rush and George take over the 2 for good.

Psyren
11-20-2010, 03:17 AM
As has been said numerous times in this thread, I'll worry when it's 2 years down the road.

The kid is 10 games into his career. I won't judge a player based on that.

cinotimz
11-20-2010, 05:36 AM
JOB gets stronger and stronger. Took him at least a year to ruin Rush and Hibbert, now he is able to ruin Paul George in a training camp + 10 games.

STRONGER THAN DIRT!

:rolleyes:


This.

George will be fine as soon as JOB is replaced, which hopefully wont be too much longer. Then the new coach will be lauded for his development work with Paul and Paul will probably be a candidate for most improved player.

dohman
11-20-2010, 09:11 AM
JOB is pretty good at developing rookies. All our draft picks have turned out pretty dang well for their amount of talent.

danny... all star
roy... future all star
rush. defense specialist and long range bomber
hans... still a work in progress but shows he can score 15 and grab around 8 boards


give him a year or two.

1984
11-20-2010, 09:19 AM
You can't compare him to Bender. Bender had injury problems that kept him from excelling.

1984
11-20-2010, 09:20 AM
JOB is pretty good at developing rookies. All our draft picks have turned out pretty dang well for their amount of talent.

danny... all star
roy... future all star
rush. defense specialist and long range bomber
hans... still a work in progress but shows he can score 15 and grab around 8 boards


give him a year or two.

Collison... stud

Eleazar
11-20-2010, 10:13 AM
JOB is pretty good at developing rookies. All our draft picks have turned out pretty dang well for their amount of talent.

danny... all star
roy... future all star
rush. defense specialist and long range bomber
hans... still a work in progress but shows he can score 15 and grab around 8 boards


give him a year or two.

I disagree with that. While I do think Hibbert has done well compared to his skill I believe that Rush has vastly underperformed, and it is still too soon to really judge Hansbrough.

BillS
11-20-2010, 10:18 AM
This.

George will be fine as soon as JOB is replaced, which hopefully wont be too much longer. Then the new coach will be lauded for his development work with Paul and Paul will probably be a candidate for most improved player.

You took that seriously? Even with the :rolleyes:?

Here's a question - if Big Roy is in serious contention for MIP this year or wins it, will JOB get the kind of credit for having 2 MIPs in his tenure that <next coach> would get if even one player gets MIP after Jim is gone?

idioteque
11-20-2010, 11:05 AM
No one outside of 465 thought Paul George was going to take the league by storm ten games into his rookie season. Give it a rest, he's a raw prospect we drafted to make the All-Star game in 5 years instead of the Rookie-Sophomore game next year.

BlueNGold
11-20-2010, 11:29 AM
If Stephen Jackson of all people can play 2-guard in this league, then Paul George certainly can.

This is true. The Jax type SG's will have problems with Ray Allen...but that has more to do with Ray's talent level.

Reggie Miller is another. Most of the great SG's in the league are 6'6" or 6'7" anyway. Actually, most of the bad ones are not short either.

MLB007
11-20-2010, 11:36 AM
He's a rookie, get back with me in two years about these concerns

He's not just a rookie, he's in his THIRD year playing away from the basket! :eek:

cdash
11-20-2010, 11:38 AM
Reggie Miller is another. Most of the great SG's in the league are 6'6" or 6'7" anyway. Actually, most of the bad ones are not short either.

I think the Eric Gordon, Monta Ellis types might be en vogue here pretty soon.

MLB007
11-20-2010, 12:10 PM
Only thing to be worried about is JOB destroying his confidence.

Point 1. He's a rookie.
Point 2. Bender had injury issues only.

2) Bender had FAR MORE than injury issues only!

Eleazar
11-20-2010, 12:31 PM
Comparing a SG to a SF is like comparing a Mandarin Orange to a Valencia Orange. There are some subtle differences like SGs tend to be better ball handlers, etc. Overall though they are pretty interchangeable, and the only obvious difference to the untrained eye is typical size.

Also this idea that the second post player is going extinct is pure fabrication. Yes, PF's are becoming more flexible, but they are still mainly low and high post players. They are not turning into wing players.

BlueNGold
11-20-2010, 12:33 PM
I think the Eric Gordon, Monta Ellis types might be en vogue here pretty soon.

That may be true. I think my previous post over-stated the height of most SG's. The big names like Kobe and Joe Johnson, however, are taller. That might be why you want big wings...unless you have a fantastic SG.

On the contenders, we have Ray Allen in Boston, Vince Carter in Orlando, DWade in Miami and Kobe Bryant in LA. I suppose Belinelli in NO, JJ in Atlanta and Manu in San Antonio are on good teams too.

It's really a range, not necessarily tall SG's...

pacers74
11-20-2010, 12:45 PM
That may be true. I think my previous post over-stated the height of most SG's. The big names like Kobe and Joe Johnson, however, are taller. That might be why you want big wings...unless you have a fantastic SG.

On the contenders, we have Ray Allen in Boston, Vince Carter in Orlando, DWade in Miami and Kobe Bryant in LA. I suppose Belinelli in NO, JJ in Atlanta and Manu in San Antonio are on good teams too.

It's really a range, not necessarily tall SG's...


I used to frown on guys that were 6'4" and under that were not true PG's, but not so much any more. With Wade, Eric Gordon, Ben Gordon ( I know he isn't an all star, but he can light it up), and OJ Mayo I am starting to rethink that. I might be in the minority here, but I would love to get Marcus Thorton out of New Orleans if they are in a trading mood right now.

danman
11-20-2010, 02:30 PM
Good Gawd....

When the Pacers drafted Paul George, Larry Bird talked about him being a couple of years away from contributing.

Paul George was a latecomer to organized basketball in high school and was unheralded, a virtual unknown outside a small part of California.

Paul George played at Fresno State and was raw even for a freshman, though his natural talent, athleticism, and shooting touch were enticing.

Fresno State plays a disorganized brand of basketball that did him few favors other than playing time and the basics.

The scouting reports said Paul George was still raw when he entered the draft. But exciting. The kind of kid with a nice handle, but one that turns it over all the time because he's inexperienced, lacking some basketball refinement.

Great build for his age, athletic, very quick for his size, excellent shooter. Not ready, but stratospheric ceiling.

NOTHING that is going on with Paul George is surprising AT ALL if you know his history and basketball. You want to kill JoB, kill him on something where he deserves it. B1tching about Paul George's playing time right now reveals a lot more about you than JoB.

[danman puts flamethrower back on the cool-down rack and rummages in the fridge for a Guinness]

PS BillS proves once again that some people cannot detect irony even if it's under a spotlight, encircled by flares.

Sollozzo
11-20-2010, 04:01 PM
Of course he has a "deer in the headlights" look. You would too if you were 20 years old and were transitioning from Fresno State to the NBA. Only the very best players are able to come in at 20 and feel comfortable.

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2010, 05:16 PM
My scouting on PG once I got to see some of him basically after the draft was that he was just way too raw. But he is athletically gifted. The similarities to Williams are remarkable if you remove the off-court issues (and Lance-James White). I keep waiting for it to diverge but so far it's been a near repeat.

The good news is that Williams did/does have that raw talent and if he had been mature enough to (ironically) mature with a few seasons under his belt he'd probably be a pretty solid player now.


Still it's a tight race for me on my "shoulda done" move which was Armon and James Anderson (now mild injury).

Of course Armon would be PG which would have demanded the move of TJ (IMO) after the Collison deal. I like PG more as a SF than I would seeing Anderson there. PG is more of a defender also.

So it might cut along the lines of roster fit when it gets down to it.

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2010, 05:28 PM
JOB is pretty good at developing rookies. All our draft picks have turned out pretty dang well for their amount of talent.

danny... all star
roy... future all star
rush. defense specialist and long range bomber
hans... still a work in progress but shows he can score 15 and grab around 8 boards


give him a year or two.
I know this comes off as just a JOB blast, but I think it's fair...

Danny was already working on his game before JOB and Roy was the kind of worker and dedicated, intelligent person that passed up a couple of million to return to G'town for another year.

Rush was already a mature, smart player at Kansas and hasn't really changed much at all as far as I can tell.

Letting them get on the court this year - well if that's what we are calling "development", but personally I think you almost have a chip-on-the-shoulder off-season thing going with Roy and Josh, I think Rush's effort right now is tied into the embarrassment of his suspension.

And if anything Danny has taken a few steps BACKWARD the last 2 years.


I'm happy to see the types of PT and rotations we are seeing from JOB this year, I don't want to spit on that. But that doesn't automatically undo the wasted rookie year of Roy who typically wasn't allowed to foul his way out just so we could see Rasho waddle up court for another 5 minutes in our "playoff push".

That ain't development.


I'll credit Bird with the types of people he brought in because I think Roy, Josh, Danny, Hans, Rush*, AJ and Collison have all proven to be pretty self-motivated. Seeing George working out with Roy adds to that list. Hans and Roy stayed in school with they could have left, AJ and Rush both overcame huge injury setbacks right on the verge of being drafted. My guess is that with Lance Larry is hoping that he wants to prove his critics wrong too, which may or may not work out.







*I know Rush's pot thing, but to me that's never translated to the court where his game is all about defense and team play. Being a reluctant scorer is not "lazy", it's just low confidence or unselfishness to a fault. Busting a** to defend is not exactly the hallmark of lazy, disinterested players.

BlueNGold
11-20-2010, 05:31 PM
Shawne Williams had a nice touch...good length...and was roughly the same size, but he is no where near this athletic.

Paul George is a cross between Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady with a much better defensive mentality. IOW, his ceiling is off the charts.

I'm excited for him. I see more talent in this guy than any Pacer I have ever seen.

Hicks
11-20-2010, 11:59 PM
Anyone else notice that when he's not being sloppy with the ball, his other passes are freakish bullet passes that are usually right on the mark?

ChicagoJ
11-21-2010, 12:30 AM
Did you watch Danny guarding Eric Gordon last night? He did a very good job on that smaller, quicker guard. And Paul is quicker than Danny.

I've been watching forwards defend guards for a long time. Occasionally it works out fine. I wouldn't take the percentages here. Its pretty easy to kill that, offensively, with some pick and roll and dribble penetration. You don't guard quick with big, and on the flip side you don't guard big with quick. Now again if the idea is that he can force matchups in his favor because of his offense, then okay...


I tend to agree the 2nd post is dying, but I don't believe the PG and SG are becoming more similar. It's more like the 2, 3 and 4 are becoming three different sizes of the same thing.

Ah yes, there's that size difference again. Thanks for pointing it out. :D I won't mind Danny and Paul on the court together. ...with a guard, a PG, and a post player. But not a Danny- Paul - Dunleavy combo. Someone will get taken the basket on a regular basis.

The SG has almost always handled the ball more on offense than the SF. Those positions are not always interchangeable. Yes, Larry Brown didn't differentiate, but partially because Derrick McKey was a better ballhandler than Reggie and he was the best player on the team at making an entry pass.

Having a second guard with a lot of ball handling skills is still a necessary component of a competitive team.

IndyPacer
11-21-2010, 06:03 PM
My scouting on PG once I got to see some of him basically after the draft was that he was just way too raw. But he is athletically gifted. The similarities to Williams are remarkable if you remove the off-court issues (and Lance-James White). I keep waiting for it to diverge but so far it's been a near repeat.


Seth, the off-court issues were basically the entire problem with Shawne Williams. It's tough to separate Shawne from that issue because as you said he was a pretty decent player besides that.

I agree that George is still pretty raw, but he has more potential than Shawne ever had. I'd be happy to have a guy who was Shawne minus the personality disorder, and George looks like he is going to be better than that.

cdash
11-22-2010, 09:16 AM
Paul George is a cross between Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady with a much better defensive mentality. IOW, his ceiling is off the charts.


If Paul George is ever on the level of Vince Carter or Tracy McGrady I think we will be in fantastic shape. Alas, I remain very skeptical that he can put his enormous physical gifts together into a package resembling either of those two guys in their primes.

ksuttonjr76
11-22-2010, 11:04 AM
If Paul George is ever on the level of Vince Carter or Tracy McGrady I think we will be in fantastic shape. Alas, I remain very skeptical that he can put his enormous physical gifts together into a package resembling either of those two guys in their primes.

McGrady wasn't McGrady until his 3rd year. George won't be George until his [insert year] year. I see flashes where George could be a good player, but I really wish that JOB would give him more PT. Right now, George is and not a concern at the same time for me.

cdash
11-22-2010, 11:21 AM
McGrady wasn't McGrady until his 3rd year. George won't be George until his [insert year] year. I see flashes where George could be a good player, but I really wish that JOB would give him more PT. Right now, George is and not a concern at the same time for me.

Honestly, if we are winning and competing for a playoff spot, I'm more than fine with George getting DNP-CDs. I'd like him to develop as much as anyone, but he doesn't do a whole lot to help us on the court right now.

Pacergeek
11-22-2010, 02:01 PM
Shawne Williams had a nice touch...good length...and was roughly the same size, but he is no where near this athletic.

Paul George is a cross between Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady with a much better defensive mentality. IOW, his ceiling is off the charts.

I'm excited for him. I see more talent in this guy than any Pacer I have ever seen.

lol.
gotta love the homerism on PD. No one would say that here if PG played for any other team.

BringJackBack
11-22-2010, 09:19 PM
lol.
gotta love the homerism on PD. No one would say that here if PG played for any other team.

Ummm? I don't know about that.