PDA

View Full Version : Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.



xIndyFan
04-11-2011, 01:18 AM
What are the rotation spots that need upgrading the most. every poster seems to have a different set of priorities for the pacer FO this summer. I just want to see what rotation spots need to be improved first?

used an 8 man rotation. if you are worrying about your teams 9th guy, your team doesn't have any problems. Starting PG, SG, SF, PF and C, backup wing, PG and big. pick the one(s) you think should be the main priority for the pacer FO to fix.

LA_Confidential
04-11-2011, 01:54 AM
I'd like to see a 4/5 combo guy brought in that would allow us to bring Tyler off the bench. Im fine with PG starting at the 2. I think we need to bring in a more steady hand to back up DC. AJ is a good guy but I'd look to upgrade.

15th parallel
04-11-2011, 02:17 AM
We need another big right now that can play center. Jeff is aging so there must be an "heir to his throne" and the sooner we can add this to our lineup, the better. It can either be a backup or starting material.

Jared Sullinger
04-11-2011, 02:23 AM
Starting PF: Hansbrough's best-case-scenario is probably as an average starting PF, and McBob's isn't even that. That's not gonna cut it.

Starting SG: Paul George has been a huge disappointment, and neither Dunleavy nor Rush are long-term answers (or even short-term in Rush's case).

Backup C: Foster can't go on forever. It's Stanko Time!

ilive4sports
04-11-2011, 02:42 AM
It's Stanko Time!

I like to refer to it as:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_wnQemZeLjpE/TM2IQwEr4kI/AAAAAAAAAMk/qZNJF7t9o-Q/s1600/75.jpg

D-BONE
04-11-2011, 06:56 AM
There's no question we could use some depth at 4/5, particularly with some length, toughness, and defensive ability. Maybe some vet depth at point, even better if defense is a strong suit.

However, over the course Vogel's run and culminating in a live look against the NYKs last night, I have made those important, but secondary priorities. If I could get one thing it would be a guy who's forte is creating offense (points or teammate opportunities) off the dribble. This could be a 1, 2, or 3.

Collison can do this to a degree, but we need more help there on offense. I realize this is not easy to obtain, but I'd have it at the top of my list and investigate every alternative. A guy like the previously bandied about A. Iguodala might fit the bill.

In the end, any of those three pieces I think helps the team in some way.

mattie
04-11-2011, 07:10 AM
Starting PF: Hansbrough's best-case-scenario is probably as an average starting PF, and McBob's isn't even that. That's not gonna cut it.

Starting SG: Paul George has been a huge disappointment, and neither Dunleavy nor Rush are long-term answers (or even short-term in Rush's case).

Backup C: Foster can't go on forever. It's Stanko Time!

In regards to Paul George: I'm with the many who are tired of hearing "they're young, they'll develop."

You cannot say that forever. But I also think you need to depend on that talent to provide the performance you expect. With George, all we've seen is home being ignored on offense, while having his bench replacement end up taking the majority of his minutes every night.

I don't think it is right to replace George. I think the correct way to handle him is directly involve him in the offense now. Make him the third option now. Expect and demand that performance. Give him his second season, as his one season to prove whether he'll realize his potential. If he doesn't not live up by that time, then we can assume the shooting guard position is a hole that needs to be filled. That is when the front office should try to acquire someone like OJ Mayo* that can be the starting guard for at least the following years. To be specific, we'd expect Paul to throw up 14-15 points a game next season efficiently every night. If he does that, we know he's on his way. If he cannot? We know it is a waste of time to ever assume he'll turn into that player.

Really, this is the case with all of our talent- Set realistic expectations with the team we have, and move on when they aren't met.

Consider the general plan that we can look forward to. We know of course the key to title run would be, in the fewest words possible, great defense, capable offense, and outstanding chemistry.

We have team now that is already developing great chemistry. They're all young basketball heads that strictly care about winning.

We have Roy who has the potential to turn into either all-star or near all-star status. He should be a 16-9 guy, that produces that consistently on a nightly basis. We've seen this the last 20 games without fail. It would be reasonable to expect consistency from him on a nightly basis next season. He's grown a lot. Now we need him to play as he is capable right now, every night. If he doesn't do that next season? If he has another up and down season? That is when consider him as trade bait for us go another direction if he cannot full fill that role. The nice thing about Roy, as he protects the rim well, he rebounds much better than people realize, and while he will get beat by some of the more offensively gifted centers in the league, he'd still be a championship caliber starter.

We have Danny Granger who is a known quantity. He does all the things you'd need from a championship caliber SF, as long as we have true number one option on offense that he can play with. Now, if Paul George next season shows absolutely no signs of being that player? That's when we look to trade Granger for something in order take our team in a different direction.

We have a core on this team that looks like they're going to be able to contend with the best. Probably the best thing for the Pacers to do is sit on that talent and let them come together as a team.

We cannot just wait for ever with the blind belief that some day they will become what we hope them to be. But at the same time, we cannot carelessly acquire talent that does not help form a true title contending unit.

I don't want a team that is inherently flawed that wins 50 games a season. It's a waste of time. It is truly tough to build a championship contending team. Let's hopefully stick to that concept, of building a team that can work together as a great unit.

I don't want to become like the Hawks. I don't see them ever competing for a championship in the next 5-7 years. I just don't see it. They wasted cap space on Joe Johnson. He's not ever going to lead them to a championship. I think the Hawks are in a terrible situation. They're winning games with a lot of talent, but how could they make the necessary movies to push them over the top? They don't have cap space, but they have a bunch of good players that are essentially overrated because of the stats they produce. (excluding Al Horford) I couldn't care less about stats if they don't correspond with a true winning team.

The Pacers essentially need to place bets. They need to place a bet on Paul George that next season he proves he'll be one of the top 2 guards with in 2-3 years. They need to place a bet that Hibbert will be a solid, dependable big man. They need to place a bet on DC that next season he proves he can be a Tony Parker level point guard, one that distributes the ball well enough, doesn't turn the ball over, and can be good enough to a solid starting point guard in the NBA.

If none, or a combination of those bets don't pay out? Then its time to make somewhat drastic moves to take the team in a new direction.

That is certainly a lot of ifs that all of those players become exactly what we need them to be. But if none of it happens? No harm no foul. Winning isn't easy. The Pacers just need to try again, and if they do things smart, like staying under the cap, and remaining patiently optimistic while keeping true realistic expectations as to the teams direction, things will turn around in a big way. The Pacers cannot sign people that do not represent the possibility of winning. That means you cannot sign, or trade for people like Joe Johnson, Monta Ellis, Al Jefferson, OJ Mayo, or David Lee. The kind of guys that do put up good numbers but will never result in a big time winning team. They're wastes of time that help their teams remain mediocre.

The Pacers are in a wonderful spot. They're actually not in a spot were they are going to be average for years to come. I think we're truly in a make it or break it position.

We have one true good player that helps us win our below 40 games. We are going to be below the cap. If the talent is realized, we stick to the formula and acquire the specific needs. IF the talent is not realized, we trade Granger for that draft pick we need, or that new young talent we need. We blow the team up. We ensure not to sign Roy for instance to a large contract that handicaps us for years to come.

I think that is the key to the Pacers success. This is what needs to happen. As fans, it seems we can see the Pacers tend to be thinking at least somewhat in the general thought process that I've laid out in this post. We can watch and enjoy what they're doing now and hopefully this works! I know I'll be rooting for Roy, Paul and DC... Go Pacers.


*OJ Mayo- later on in this post I make the argument you couldn't sign him as he has not shown he'd be someone who could help lead us to a championship. However-, if the Pacers were at the point were they thought they needed just one piece, such a shooting guard, then they could sign someone like OJ to a small contract to be a temporary solution to the shooting guard problem until we are able to find the right player for the job.

Shade
04-11-2011, 07:30 AM
George was not even supposed to be a contributor this year, so everything he's given us so far has just been gravy. Plus, he's really more of a 3 than a 2. He'll be fine.

We need to upgrade starting SG for sure, and probably PF unless Bro becomes more consistent there. I think we'll have a good idea of our starting PG situation after the Chicago series. And pretty much every back-up spot could use an upgrade.

In short, there is a lot of work to be done this summer.

vnzla81
04-11-2011, 07:47 AM
We need an starting PG and an starting SG.

Unclebuck
04-11-2011, 07:56 AM
Get back with me after the playoffs

mattie
04-11-2011, 08:02 AM
George was not even supposed to be a contributor this year, so everything he's given us so far has just been gravy. Plus, he's really more of a 3 than a 2. He'll be fine.

We need to upgrade starting SG for sure, and probably PF unless Bro becomes more consistent there. I think we'll have a good idea of our starting PG situation after the Chicago series. And pretty much every back-up spot could use an upgrade.

In short, there is a lot of work to be done this summer.


We need an starting PG and an starting SG.

If we have a rookie starting at 2 guard now, after his 2 years playing college ball, and if we all agree he has a lot of potential, why would want someone else to play in his stead?

How does it make any sense to sign someone to start ahead of him when it is quite clear he should (meaning, expected) mature into a solid starter in his second season? Why waste cap space acquiring someone for a position in which we already feel we have the long term solution for that position?? If he is not good enough to start in his second season, as a 21 year old with already 3 years experience combined from both college and pro, than is he not already a bust?

Shouldn't we be using all resources to get players at the other positions such as PG and PF? Most everyone on this board agrees they don't think DC is the long term solution and they do not think Tyler is a starting quality PF. I'd think that would be most everyones main concern right?

I realize I must be wrong, as I simply cannot understand the thought process behind it even with the majority of the board having similar opinions. But I'd like to understand it. I've made it quite clear why I think in this coming off season the 2 guard position is the last thing we need to look for. What am I missing?

OakMoses
04-11-2011, 08:34 AM
This is stolen from Count55, but it helped me understand Paul George a bit. These are the usage rates of the 4 other starters:

Danny 26.7%
Hibbert 23.8%
Tyler 23.3%
Collison 22.0%

If you add that up, you see that these 4 guys are using 95.8% of the possessions when they're on the floor together. There's not much more than scraps for George to pick up. (Yes, I know that adding usage rates is simplistic and mildly inaccurate, but I do think this paints an accurate picture of what goes on when the starting unit is on the floor.)

2 more things:

UB is right, we'll know a bunch more after we watch the 4 playoff games.

Also, my line is the same. We need to take advantage of whatever opportunity we have to improve the overall talent. There is no player on the team who's good enough to consider their position "locked down" at the moment.

vnzla81
04-11-2011, 09:02 AM
Get back with me after the playoffs

I'm not sure if playoffs is the tool use to rate the players, remember how Croshere looked in the playoffs and because of that he got a huge contract? I think that playoffs should be a tool but not the tool.

Unclebuck
04-11-2011, 09:05 AM
I'm not sure if playoffs is the tool use to rate the players, remember how Croshere looked in the playoffs and because of that he got a huge contract? I think that playoffs should be a tool but not the tool.


if you go back and re-watch the entire 2000 playoffs, it was only in the lakers series where Cro was good in more than 1 game per series.

I think you learn a lot about your team in the playoffs. I whole lot more than a few meaningless games at the end of the regiular season

Sherlock
04-11-2011, 09:36 AM
UB is right, we'll know a bunch more after we watch the 4 playoff games.


Come on. Be optimistic.
We cam make it a 5 game series. :)

BRushWithDeath
04-11-2011, 10:10 AM
I chose PG because I didn't realize it was a multiple choice poll and PG is the biggest issue in my opinion.

What is also clear is that the current rotation needs a change.

It doesn't work well.

There are 4 guys who want and need to score to be effective and 1 guy who may as well not be on the floor offensively and fouls way too much on the other end.

We need at least two guys who are capable of making a positive impact without scoring. Right now, none of our starters can.

BringJackBack
04-11-2011, 10:32 AM
Starting SG
Starting PF
Backup PG
Backup SF
Backup C

-I'm not ready to give up on DC, and he's been playing great lately save for the last two minutes of last night's game.

-We are set at SF and C.

-Tyler should be a sixth man and get his points in the second unit. We just don't have a legit (As in, a double double guy) starting four to start over him.

-We need a starting shooting guard and power forward. We need a garbage man four who doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective. Think Paul Milsap or Josh Smith.

-Backup center as we do not know if Foster's back is going to hold up for much longer.

-We need a veteran, defensive backup three who can bring some leadership. Think Shane Battier, Tayshaun Prince, or AK47.

-Just get a good backup point guard. Preferably one who can do a decent job defending point guards if Darren gets lax on defense.

OakMoses
04-11-2011, 11:27 AM
I like the players we have, but I don't see them amounting to anything more than a consistent first round playoff loser if we just let them develop moving forward.

We're not "set" anywhere.

My mantra if I were the GM this summer would be this: "Danny Granger will not be unquestionably the best player on this team next season."

Hicks
04-11-2011, 11:53 AM
Starting SG: Paul George has been a huge disappointment


........ the ****?

wintermute
04-11-2011, 11:59 AM
I was going for starting PF and backup big but clicked on starting C by mistake. Sorry Roy.

Whatever happens in the playoffs, we'll need more bigs. We have only two big men (Hibbert and Hans, 3 if you count Posey) under contract next season. Now, it might turn out that the backcourt presents a better opportunity for upgrades in the summer. But even so, we'll still need to find a way to flesh out the big man rotation. Some much needed athleticism, strength, and toughness wouldn't go amiss.

Sookie
04-11-2011, 12:22 PM
We need a starting shooting guard and a backup center that can score.

I'd like to see a Rotation of

DC/Price
SG/Paul
Danny/Dun
Hans/Josh
Hibbert/C

next season, use Rush to get us something, give PG another couple of years to develop, and I love Foster, and I'd use him in spot minutes, but we need another post scorer.

I'd re-sign Dun to the MLE if we can, especially if we use Rush to get something. (If we don't trade Rush, I guess we can let Dun go, and have Rush play the backup wing along with PG)

Leave the PF and PG positions. Those are four guys that I'd give another year to. As I think PG is settled for the future, and PF might be. People were way too hard on the two young PGs this season, give them both another year. 3rd year is when they make their biggest jump anyway. PF, I'm not AS sold, but I think it's possible, especially if we have our scoring positions at other places, that Josh and Hans can hold down the PF spot.

Our biggest need currently is shooting guard. PG will be a star, I expect. But he's not ready yet. I'd rather him come off the bench.

wintermute
04-11-2011, 12:32 PM
This is stolen from Count55, but it helped me understand Paul George a bit. These are the usage rates of the 4 other starters:

Danny 26.7%
Hibbert 23.8%
Tyler 23.3%
Collison 22.0%

If you add that up, you see that these 4 guys are using 95.8% of the possessions when they're on the floor together. There's not much more than scraps for George to pick up. (Yes, I know that adding usage rates is simplistic and mildly inaccurate, but I do think this paints an accurate picture of what goes on when the starting unit is on the floor.)


Are you sure that's Count's work? Ian Levy posted something on usage rates on Cornrows not very long ago, maybe this is what you meant?

http://www.indycornrows.com/2011/3/22/2063158/numeric-narratives-until-you-use-me-up

I do agree that George getting shut out appears to be due in part to his playing with a bunch of high usage guys. On the other hand, it's also on himself to demand the ball and take more shots. I mean, Tyler obviously doesn't have any problems being assertive.

Justin Tyme
04-11-2011, 01:30 PM
Ok, I'm old school, but shouldn't a poll add up to 100%?? The top 3 choices of SG, PF, and bu/Big of 39 + 42 + 36= 117%. That's not including the % of the other categories. Is this some form of new math system I'm not familiar with?

mattie
04-11-2011, 01:33 PM
Ok, I'm old school, but shouldn't a poll add up to 100%?? The top 3 choices of SG, PF, and bu/Big of 39 + 42 + 36= 117%. That's not including the % of the other categories. Is this some form of new math system I'm not familiar with?

you can make multiple choices.

BRushWithDeath
04-11-2011, 01:34 PM
Ok, I'm old school, but shouldn't a poll add up to 100%?? The top 3 choices of SG, PF, and bu/Big of 39 + 42 + 36= 117%. That's not including the % of the other categories. Is this some form of new math system I'm not familiar with?

Multiple choice.

JEM
04-11-2011, 05:04 PM
Foster might retire , Ford is gone.. Rush and McRoberts will probably be traded. That leaves Hibbert , Hansbrough , Granger ( Even he might be traded ) , Dunleavy , Jones ( maybe ) , Solo , George ..

Pacers have a good bit to do in the off season.

OakMoses
04-11-2011, 06:12 PM
Are you sure that's Count's work? Ian Levy posted something on usage rates on Cornrows not very long ago, maybe this is what you meant?

http://www.indycornrows.com/2011/3/22/2063158/numeric-narratives-until-you-use-me-up

I do agree that George getting shut out appears to be due in part to his playing with a bunch of high usage guys. On the other hand, it's also on himself to demand the ball and take more shots. I mean, Tyler obviously doesn't have any problems being assertive.

I got the numbers from an email conversation with Count, so I know it came from him. I know he reads Levy's work though - and why wouldn't he, it's great. Anyway, usage rate #'s aren't proprietary and there are a number of websites where you can find them.

Jared Sullinger
04-11-2011, 07:00 PM
........ the ****?

I'm talking about since becoming a starter after his earlier flashes of brilliance. He's regressed tremendously, in my opinion, to the point where I'm no more confident that he's the long-term answer at SG than I am that Collison and Hansbrough are the long-term answers at PG an PF, respectively.

ilive4sports
04-11-2011, 07:19 PM
I'm talking about since becoming a starter after his earlier flashes of brilliance. He's regressed tremendously, in my opinion, to the point where I'm no more confident that he's the long-term answer at SG than I am that Collison and Hansbrough are the long-term answers at PG an PF, respectively.

How has he regressed? How has he been disappointing? He wasn't even expect to contribute this season. Now he is our starting SG. That is a great season for him. Thats one of the best rookie seasons we have seen here recently.

I really hope you don't just look at his scoring. When he is out on the floor now he is not a primary option. He is pretty much the 5th option on the floor right now. There is nothing he had shown before becoming a starter that has suddenly disappeared since become a starter. He's not as aggressive because that is not his role in the line up anymore.

DaveP63
04-12-2011, 08:53 AM
Copied from another thread:

It is a matter of what we want versus what we need...

What we (at PD) want: A new/veteran/better PG, SG, SF, PF, C...

What we (Pacers) need depending on who is re-signed: A guy that can get his own and hit "that" shot, any time, any where. Normally, that guy is not going to be your center. Nor is it normally your power forward. We have several small forwards/SGs and your starter is Danny Granger for the near future. We all tend to vomit blood around here if the point guard doesn't have more assists than points, so that leaves the 2 guard...So who do you get and who do you sit?

mattie
04-12-2011, 11:00 AM
The funny thing is, no matter who the Pacers pickup for 2 guard, that player will probably end up averaging 8-10 points a game. Just like Dunleavy. Just like Rush. Just like George.

The Pacers just do not run an offense that allows that 2nd wing to contribute.

BillS
04-12-2011, 11:24 AM
The funny thing is, no matter who the Pacers pickup for 2 guard, that player will probably end up averaging 8-10 points a game. Just like Dunleavy. Just like Rush. Just like George.

The Pacers just do not run an offense that allows that 2nd wing to contribute.

Partly that's because of who we have now at that position. Dunleavy is streaky, Rush is not an offensive player, PG is a rookie. You weren't going to design an SG-focused offense around those guys.

mattie
04-12-2011, 11:34 AM
Partly that's because of who we have now at that position. Dunleavy is streaky, Rush is not an offensive player, PG is a rookie. You weren't going to design an SG-focused offense around those guys.

Sure Indiana fans have been taught for years that rookies aren't allowed to do anything but play 20 minutes a game and "develop" (whatever that means). But unless Indiana is ready to give up some assets and spend some money, it will be tough for them to find anybody over the summer that can score better than Paul George right now.

BillS
04-12-2011, 12:01 PM
Sure Indiana fans have been taught for years that rookies aren't allowed to do anything but play 20 minutes a game and "develop" (whatever that means). But unless Indiana is ready to give up some assets and spend some money, it will be tough for them to find anybody over the summer that can score better than Paul George right now.

There are many real reasons why a second year player will struggle, not least of which being that other teams will now have a "book" on him. Even given that, you have to evaluate the rest of your offensive capabilities to decide how you design the system.

As long as we have a scoring point guard, a first wing who is a primary scorer, and a center who is expected to have the offense go to him, you are not going to have a good spot for a second wing in the starting rotation. However, since you very likely don't have that in the second unit, it makes perfect sense to bring that scoring 2 as your primary weapon off the bench.

Unless you dump Danny Granger as your 3, he will be the scoring wing. Unless you get a pass-first point guard, your point guard will be a high scoring option. And you can't get rid of the front court game or you live and die by the jump shot.

I'd venture to say that the latter concept (front court offense a low priority and live/die by the jump shot) has BEEN the "Indiana" style over many decades, which would open up for a second scoring wing as the third option. The very thing that supposedly means we are hurting ourselves by not using the SG is what gives us versatility in our offense.

In other words, the offense is not somehow designed in a vacuum, it is designed around the players we have. If we get an SG who is a great scorer (wither through Paul's maturity or through FA), we would re-evaluate the rest of the team. In my mind, if we get a scoring SG on the FA market our next move would be to change the PG position, which is not impossible.