PDA

View Full Version : Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play



Peck
12-02-2012, 02:14 AM
First let me start off with stating the obvious, going 2-1 on a West Coast swing is a good thing. I didn’t get a chance to fire off one of these last night so I don’t want the fact that we lost tonight & I will be complaining take away from the fact that I do consider this a successful road trip.

We haven’t turned the corner as a team yet but you can certainly start to see some improvement from where we were just 3 weeks ago.

Now having said that let’s deal with tonight’s loss.

The Warriors are actually pretty good. In the long run I don’t see them leading the Pacific but who knows with some of those teams out there. They have a really good back court & while they still need some more size up front they have at least started to play a far more physical game than they used to. You can thank Mark Jackson for that.

Honestly being the second night of a back to back I’m not surprised we lost and actually even though I can’t say we played particularly well I will say if Jack had not had the incredible shooting night he did I think we could have pulled this one out. But then again maybe not, can’t live off of what ifs. He did get hot and they pulled away.

Again I am not blaming the entire loss on this but once again Frank played the bench as a unit in the first and let the get behind on a G.S. 10-0 run before he did anything. The starters had the lead but once they lost the lead I think we battled back to take a one time two point lead but that was it. He has got to stop using them as a unit or if he must he has to realize right away when they get behind a 6-0 run he has got to stop it.

Now to their credit they played very well in the 3rd when the starters just didn’t bring it so there is that.

I think David West was just gassed and sadly right now we have to depend on him for almost 40 min. a night as on the W.C. trip Tyler has just been horrid. His shot is not falling and every since we have come out west his lack of vertical has really been exposed more than normal.

Also it is very apparent that Frank has a very short tolerance for Lance Stephenson. Lance made a mistake by not being ready for a pass that West threw to him causing a turn over and he also showed up late on a couple of defensive assignments and that was the night for him. I have no problem with that btw as long as he does that with most of the other players, but let’s just say that our other wing player is not held to the same standard and frankly tonight did not deserve to play one min. more than Lance.

Also just for an interesting bit of trivia for tonight. Miles Plumlee drafted at 26 was not dressed to play tonight (it was his turn to not play) and Festus Ezeli drafted at 30 started for the Warriors. Don’t get me wrong Mahinmi played well tonight, I thought anyway, but man wouldn’t it have been nice to have that big bruiser waiting in the wings?

Let’s just do grades for tonight.

David West: A
He is still living some off of that A+++ game from Sacramento. But you could tell he didn’t have his legs totally under him tonight but even with that he still led us in points, rebounds, steals and tied for the lead in assist. What more can you ask from the guy? I’m sure he would have liked to have gotten any help at all from someone beyond Hill & Roy but alas it wasn’t to be. While these are game to game reviews I want to say that West has stepped up and played large & in charge on this W/C swing.

Paul George: F-
His trade value will never be higher.
I was tempted to just leave it at that but his game is so putrid right now that I feel the need to add this. I never want to hear another word about moving Granger so Paul George can play his natural position of small forward. I knew at the time his 37 point game was pyrite and I said so after the game. Will he get better? Well frankly he has to, I don’t know if it’s possible to play worse. Hell Roy in his worst games of the season still somehow scored a point. He’s starting to make me miss Brandon Rush and I don’t even like Brandon Rush. Here’s a fun fact, he has now played in 17 games and has only shot a total of 33 free throws.

Roy Hibbert: B+
Very solid defensive game from Roy. He also did fairly well from the field and hit 3 of his 4 free throws. His rebounding might have been a little better but the danger of playing a team like the Warriors is that a lot of their shots go long so that kind of negates interior position. If we could have gotten anything at all from George Roy’s game was good enough to win. But when your small forward position nets you 8 points (all by the backup) everybody else is going to have to play above average. Well Roy defended slightly above average but his offense was just average.

Lance Stephenson: C
Started the game out great and even as bad as his night ended up it was still better that Paul George’s craptastic game. He made a couple of mental errors and Frank pulled him. I think he was hoping that lightning would strike again & Young would not only defend well but have another amazing scoring night. Didn’t happen and Lance was, IMO, needlessly benched. Still learning to move without the ball and I think that is probably going to be very hard to learn for him but he is getting better.

George Hill: A-
Just ran out of gas at the end. He could not keep up with the fresh Jack and then the refreshed Curry. Had a great night from behind the arc and almost brought us back in the game but I just think he didn’t have anything left.

Tyler Hansbrough: F
He also was scoreless but at least he only played 11 min. and frankly being a bench player isn’t expected to bring at least 14 points a night to the floor. Is that to much to ask of Paul btw? Just bring 14 points to the game on a nightly basis; I’ve given up on the 20ppg that we all thought might be there so how about just reaching double figures? Anyway Tyler has had a horrific W/C swing and he has got to get to playing better because West will not be able to keep up these kind of min. Maybe seeing Carlos Boozer will light a fire under him.

Ian Mahinmi: B+
We are finally starting to see what we saw in the pre-season from Ian. He fouls to much but I think we are just going to have to get used to that from him. He is doing a decent job of protecting the rim and while I’d like to see him get more active on the boards he at least has been playing offense like he means it lately. 6 of 8 from the line is a blessing. Again he played well enough from his position to win this game, if only he could have gotten some help from his small forward.

Gerald Green: B
Not the greatest defensive exhibition you will ever see but it was good enough. His shooting was solid and he was doing work on the board. In fact you could say that he played well enough from his position for us to have won the game. If only he could have gotten some help from his starter.

Sam Young: C+
Deducting some points for not hitting enough shots. However let’s be honest here if you are really needing him to hit his shots to give you a chance to win your likelihood of winning is not great anyway. Decent defense as always and hustle as always. But since I didn’t get to comment on his Kings game I’ll give him a little break on this game.

D.J. Augustin: C+
Honestly just too short for Jack. He couldn’t do anything with him because Jarrett would just pull up and nail the jumper right over him. But I still wonder why with his size he doesn’t try to press the dribbler and get the ball out of their hands. Decent from the field and he made good passes to get people good shots but they just flat out missed them. Still once again we are only able to get Hill 11 min. of rest for the game; I have real doubts about if George ever gets injured.

No real shame in losing the game but there is one player who should be ashamed of the game he played. Again good west coast trip and now we can come home for a day and get ready to face the Bulls.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NwwY9y6O3hw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

PacersHomer
12-02-2012, 02:20 AM
God I love that movie. That's all I have to add.

Miller_time04
12-02-2012, 02:51 AM
What do you think about Ian playing the back up four when west needs a break if Tyler isn't playing that good on certain nights? I like the idea of Roy and Ian next to each other defensively. Ian doesn't bring the offensive game West brings obviously but it's slightly better than Tyler's hoping he gets fouled offense. I know we tried it in the pre season but I'd really like to try it now.

Nuntius
12-02-2012, 03:12 AM
Also just for an interesting bit of trivia for tonight. Miles Plumlee drafted at 26 was not dressed to play tonight (it was his turn to not play) and Festus Ezeli drafted at 30 started for the Warriors. Donít get me wrong Mahinmi played well tonight, I thought anyway, but man wouldnít it have been nice to have that big bruiser waiting in the wings?


We do have that big bruiser. He's called Miles Plumlee. We just don't play him.

The Warriors are forced to play Ezeli. Their starting Center (Bogut) is injured and their back-up Center (Biedrins) is sucking donkey *** the last 2-3 years. So, they're out of options.

Don't get me wrong, Ezeli is playing good. He's in my fantasy team for a reason ;)

But I'm quite confident that if Miles got the same chances that Ezeli is getting he would play just as good.

However, I'm happy to have a healthy starting Center and a good back-up unlike them :)

Peck
12-02-2012, 03:23 AM
What do you think about Ian playing the back up four when west needs a break if Tyler isn't playing that good on certain nights? I like the idea of Roy and Ian next to each other defensively. Ian doesn't bring the offensive game West brings obviously but it's slightly better than Tyler's hoping he gets fouled offense. I know we tried it in the pre season but I'd really like to try it now.

I'm not sure.

I like the idea but at the end of the day Ian has to be able to give Roy some breathing time on the bench and he fouls so frequently now that I'm not sure he could play another position without fouling out.

However when Tyler plays like this, fortunately he has not played like this all season long, my answer would be sure why not.

CableKC
12-02-2012, 03:37 AM
We do have that big bruiser. He's called Miles Plumlee. We just don't play him.

The Warriors are forced to play Ezeli. Their starting Center (Bogut) is injured and their back-up Center (Biedrins) is sucking donkey *** the last 2-3 years. So, they're out of options.

Don't get me wrong, Ezeli is playing good. He's in my fantasy team for a reason ;)

But I'm quite confident that if Miles got the same chances that Ezeli is getting he would play just as good.

However, I'm happy to have a healthy starting Center and a good back-up unlike them :)
I have to agree with this......I was sitting behind the bench and was scanning the bench for Plumlee sitting in a suit and didn't see him. But I think that Vogel sees Plumlee as a Center...and that role is filled by Mahinmi. I'd have ZERO problem having Plumlee taking Hansbrough's minutes if he's not doing anything....but from the few garbage minutes that I have seen him play.....I liked what I saw...he's active, has length and far more athletic than anyone on else on the Team.

CableKC
12-02-2012, 03:40 AM
What do you think about Ian playing the back up four when west needs a break if Tyler isn't playing that good on certain nights? I like the idea of Roy and Ian next to each other defensively. Ian doesn't bring the offensive game West brings obviously but it's slightly better than Tyler's hoping he gets fouled offense. I know we tried it in the pre season but I'd really like to try it now.
Is it me or is it that Vogel hasn't played Mahinmi with Hibbert that much together?

AesopRockOn
12-02-2012, 04:01 AM
If anyone actually expected 20 points per game from him, I have only sympathy for Paul.

CableKC
12-02-2012, 04:09 AM
If anyone actually expected 20 points per game from him, I have only sympathy for Paul.
I would have been happy with him just scoring 12 points.

Psyren
12-02-2012, 04:15 AM
If anyone actually expected 20 points per game from him, I have only sympathy for Paul.

But is it too much to ask that my starting SF scores 1 point?

F*** is Paul frustrating to watch.

Miller_time04
12-02-2012, 05:17 AM
Is it me or is it that Vogel hasn't played Mahinmi with Hibbert that much together?

I don't think he has at all really in the regular season. I'd like to at least try it out.


But yeah I'd love for Paul to average 14/8/3/2 steals while being a defensive stopper.

xtacy
12-02-2012, 05:47 AM
Paul George: F-
His trade value will never be higher.
I was tempted to just leave it at that but his game is so putrid right now that I feel the need to add this. I never want to hear another word about moving Granger so Paul George can play his natural position of small forward. I knew at the time his 37 point game was pyrite and I said so after the game. Will he get better? Well frankly he has to, I don’t know if it’s possible to play worse. Hell Roy in his worst games of the season still somehow scored a point. He’s starting to make me miss Brandon Rush and I don’t even like Brandon Rush. Here’s a fun fact, he has now played in 17 games and has only shot a total of 33 free throws.

i started to doubt it. i mean the rest of the league can't be stupid enough to trade for him, can they? imo we are stuck with him and that's depressing.

Sollozzo
12-02-2012, 08:24 AM
I'm not ready to give up on Paul George. He's still just a 22 year old third year player. That's the age that a rookie is if they stay all four years in college. That's the age Roy was in his rookie season, and look how much better he's become in his mid 20's. Paul is still a very young kid in a man's league. Virtually no player in the NBA peaks at age 22. You don't know what you really have in a player until they are at least age 24-25. If Paul was playing like this in his fifth season, then yes I'd agree that he likely wasn't ever going to get much better. But he still has all the time in the world. You don't give up on a talent like Paul when they're just 22 years old unless you get some trade package that blows you away.

The problem is that this forum hyped him up way too much and had T-Mac-like expectations for him.

D-BONE
12-02-2012, 08:38 AM
DJ rarely play press D on the ballhandler b/c, in addition to being lilliputian in statue, he's also slow as molasses straight line and laterally. Not a good combination of physical attributes. I don't see how the guy gets a C+. Per usual, he has 2-3 good plays, but they fail to override his poor ones coupled with his overall ineffectiveness and influence on the game as a whole.

Can we add another player to the roster? My impression is yes. If so, I'd do it and reduce DJ's court time as much as possible. He is such a defensive liability there's almost nothing he could do to make up for it.

3rdStrike
12-02-2012, 09:59 AM
I'm not ready to give up on Paul George. He's still just a 22 year old third year player. That's the age that a rookie is if they stay all four years in college. That's the age Roy was in his rookie season, and look how much better he's become in his mid 20's. Paul is still a very young kid in a man's league. Virtually no player in the NBA peaks at age 22. You don't know what you really have in a player until they are at least age 24-25. If Paul was playing like this in his fifth season, then yes I'd agree that he likely wasn't ever going to get much better. But he still has all the time in the world.

The problem is that this forum hyped him up way too much and had T-Mac-like expectations for him.

What is the expiration date on this lame excuse? 28? Should we wait six years to expect anything? You know how old Klay Thompson is? Twenty-two. Same age. Roasted him alive.

TMac expectations were a combined product of his college play & his self-created hype, because he talks about being the man and getting to that superstar/elite scoring level. Don't blame people for expecting him to put some effort behind his words. In any case, scoring 0 is inexcusable from a starter, period. And to think, some people thought he had "turned the corner" after that fluke all-3's performance. Yuck.

Zero points, zero effort. His new nickname should be NEX. As in, No EXpectations. Because from now on that's certainly what I'll have. You want to give a guy the benefit of the doubt, especially when he talks such a good talk. But at the end of the day you've got 18 yr olds who come in the league with a scorer's mentality (hint: more than jacking up threes), but this guy is playing like a backup with wasted height.

I mean seriously, it's more than the lack of ability/desire to score. He's not even as effective as he should be defensively. Two years later and he's still regularly having the same mental lapses we saw from his rookie season.

I'm not saying cut him, but I might be saying bench him when Granger comes back, because Lance is playing better on-ball and obviously better on offense.

Sollozzo
12-02-2012, 10:06 AM
What is the expiration date on this lame excuse? 28? Should we wait six years to expect anything? You know how old Klay Thompson is? Twenty-two. Same age. Roasted him alive.

TMac expectations were a combined product of his college play & his self-created hype, because he talks about being the man and getting to that superstar/elite scoring level. Don't blame people for expecting him to put some effort behind his words. In any case, scoring 0 is inexcusable from a starter, period. And to think, some people thought he had "turned the corner" after that fluke all-3's performance. Yuck.

Zero points, zero effort. His new nickname should be NEX. As in, No EXpectations. Because from now on that's certainly what I'll have. You want to give a guy the benefit of the doubt, especially when he talks such a good talk. But at the end of the day you've got 18 yr olds who come in the league with a scorer's mentality (hint: more than jacking up threes), but this guy is playing like a backup with wasted height.

I mean seriously, it's more than the lack of ability/desire to score. He's not even as effective as he should be defensively. Two years later and he's still regularly having the same mental lapses we saw from his rookie season.

I'm not saying cut him, but I might be saying bench him when Granger comes back, because Lance is playing better on-ball and obviously better on offense.

Well for starters, let's not act like the guy has done nothing. Over the course of his three years here, he has played very good defense and has shown that he has the skills to score the ball. He started on a team that had the 5th best record in the league last year.

Yeah he had zero points and no effort last night. But just a week and a half ago he hit nine threes. Neither one of those extremes should be used to predict the type of player he'll be. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

I don't know what the expiration date is on this "excuse". But after watching the NBA for years, I do know that very very very few players have hit their peak at age 22. It's an extremely young age anyway you slice it. Many rookies are that age. I don't think you really know what a player is until about age 25. I'm not saying that the dude is going to be dropping 25 a game in a couple of years. But I am saying that he should get stronger, more confident, more knowledgeable about he what he needs to do, etc etc.

Isn't a lot of the stuff being said about Paul the same type of stuff that we used to say about Roy in his first couple of seasons? Roy had mental lapses in his third season too.

3rdStrike
12-02-2012, 10:21 AM
He has played very good defense.........sometimes. He's also had a lot of bad defense. He started on a team that had the 5th best record in the league...so did Darren Collison. Nobody is saying Paul George is going to average 0 ppg. But if he averages 12-13 ppg with Granger out (by jacking up threes and refusing to approach the basket or get to the line) and while the team is desperately sputtering then he will be deemed a disappointment by (almost) all.

And where is Roy now? All those mental lapses added up to a career best 12.4 ppg in a contract year, and now he's a 7'2 starting center shooting 39%....who is still suffering from mental lapses.

Sollozzo
12-02-2012, 10:24 AM
He has played very good defense.........sometimes. He's also had a lot of bad defense. He started on a team that had the 5th best record in the league...so did Darren Collison. Nobody is saying Paul George is going to average 0 ppg. But if he averages 12-13 ppg with Granger out (by jacking up threes and refusing to approach the basket or get to the line) and while the team is desperately sputtering then he will be deemed a disappointment by (almost) all.

And where is Roy now? All those mental lapses added up to a career best 12.4 ppg in a contract year, and now he's a 7'2 starting center shooting 39%....who is still suffering from mental lapses.

Everything you say is true. All I'm saying is that I'd be surprised if he didn't improve over the next 2-3 seasons. Youth is a valid excuse in the NBA, IMHO. Most 22 year olds are going to struggle in the NBA at times.

3rdStrike
12-02-2012, 10:36 AM
He and Lance were my favorite players a year ago, so I admit the fan in me may overreact a bit when it comes to PG. I'm just worried about him plateauing early. Not sure we have a staff that is conducive to player development.

Justin Tyme
12-02-2012, 10:42 AM
I would have been happy with him just scoring 12 points.


As you're alluding to those 12 points, they would have won the game.

Sorry, but I thought PG's "D" was terrible. He was AWOL in this game. It's this type of tripe from PG that Peck's comment "his trade value will never be higher" has me really thinking about it.

I've said from day ONE PG was drafted to replace BRush. As Peck stated It's obvious SF isn't his position nor is he Granger's future replacement. For those that still think PG is, they had better wake up and see the reality he isn't. Look for the Pacers to draft or trade for Granger's replacement as that replacement isn't currently on the Pacers roster.

Sparhawk
12-02-2012, 10:46 AM
Frustrating loss made moreso by Vogel's dumb substitutions.

Justin Tyme
12-02-2012, 10:50 AM
i started to doubt it. i mean the rest of the league can't be stupid enough to trade for him, can they? imo we are stuck with him and that's depressing.


Look at the bright side... at least the Pacers didn't draft Wes Johnson at #4 or Cole Aldrich #11 who was one pick behind Paul George. It could have been worse!

CJ Jones
12-02-2012, 10:52 AM
He and Lance were my favorite players a year ago, so I admit the fan in me may overreact a bit when it comes to PG. I'm just worried about him plateauing early. Not sure we have a staff that is conducive to player development.

This. I'm not blaming the offense entirely, but it's not a great offense to be developing young wings in. We ask our wings to stand around the perimeter and shoot 3's when our bigs kick it out, and that's what they do. Granger never would have developed into the player he is today if had to play in this offense early in his career.

Justin Tyme
12-02-2012, 11:09 AM
Isn't a lot of the stuff being said about Paul the same type of stuff that we used to say about Roy in his first couple of seasons? Roy had mental lapses in his third season too.


The next player the Pacers draft, whoever it is, has to be stronger mentally. I've b****** about how much Hill got paid, but I've NEVER complained about his mental attitude or lack of mental toughness. I'd rather have the toughness in a lesser quality player than have another Mr. Softee with All World Potential. Potential only gets you so far in this league. Prime example is Gerald Green. Mental toughness can overcome less athleticism. I don't need to see highlite reel dunks or live by the 3 pt shot. I want to see scoring from inside, mid-range, and outside. I want to see the attitude you can't stop me from what I want to do. Paul George doesn't have that type of attitude, and I don't envision seeing he'll develop one either.

One of the reasons I've been a Jerritt Jack fan is he's a mentally tough player. Last nites game from Jack is just why I felt Bird dropped the ball and made a humongous blunder not re-signing Jack.

xtacy
12-02-2012, 11:20 AM
I'm not ready to give up on Paul George. He's still just a 22 year old third year player.

said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.

rexnom
12-02-2012, 11:35 AM
said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.
Does Andre Iguodala have killer instinct?

Maybe you need killer instinct if you're going to be a top banana but we know that Paul won't be that. Just like Roy doesn't really need to score that much. With Danny, West, and Hill we just need Roy and Paul to be complementary players.

Ace E.Anderson
12-02-2012, 11:46 AM
Idk how I feel about this whole age excuse. PG has been in the league, receiving consistent minutes since the second half of his first yr. Yes he's improved, but it's been steady, smaller improvements. It's not the fact that he doesn't score 20ppg that pisses ppl off, it's the fact that he has times where he plays like he doesn't care. Thompson is the same age and has been in the league a yr less than PG, and he doesn't seem to be struggling to look to shoot or score.

Many of the better players in this league are extremely young. SO I don't buy the "it's because he's young" bit. His defense has been inconsistent this year as well. More than a few players have scored on Paul pretty easily. If he's not playing good defense, then at this point he's an average to below average starter, because his J is inconsistent, he can't create his own shot, and he can often times be lazy.

We dont fully know what we have in PG at this point, but if he's going to continue to be so inconsistent, he needs to be on a short leash in the same way that Lance is. Lance's inconsistent play stems from being too aggressive, Paul is the opposite.

Nuntius
12-02-2012, 12:02 PM
i started to doubt it. i mean the rest of the league can't be stupid enough to trade for him, can they? imo we are stuck with him and that's depressing.

They are still stupid enough to trade for him. They will attribute his struggles to everything else but him. Be it the abysmal Pacers offense or the presence of Danny. People will still want to trade for him 'till his 5th year at least because he is simply so young and so athletic.

vnzla81
12-02-2012, 12:18 PM
Funny how the Danny Grangers fan club members and Danny Granger excuse makers are the ones that want to trade Paul George because "is enough of excuse making" lol, yeah let's trade the guy with the must potential and let's keep Danny and West for the future because "they are guys that play like old mans so they should be able to play for at least 5 more years" .....


At this point I'm hoping they trade him for another "old man game" type of player to see what this same people are going to say when Paul George is kicking a$$ on another team and the Pacers are in rebuilding mode once again.

3rdStrike
12-02-2012, 12:49 PM
For some constructive criticism of PG, besides the obvious stuff (shoot more but less from outside, get to the line): When he whiffs a shot he almost always has poor form. A shot doesn't have to be pretty to be effective (Reggie was the master of the off-balance, awkward but deadly shot), but he's got plenty of time and still rushes it.

He takes one or two inside fadeaways per game. I've said it before, but this is a shot he needs to take more often, but mixing in a pump-fake. He's still shooting close to 0% on the season on those shots, but it's because he doesn't finish with form so the shots always hit the front of the rim. This gets me to wondering why a 6'10 guy would rush a fadeaway against defenders who are almost invariably shorter than he is (and thus have almost no chance to block the shot). The answer, I think, is the same reason he doesn't take the ball to the basket: He is very scared of contact.

Why he's so scared of contact, I don't know. Maybe he feels like his body can't handle it, but if that's the case he needs to hit the weights (which was suggested by several posters in the offseason). I think it's crazy when people say he can't be an elite scorer. He absolutely can, the physical tools and ability to shoot from outside are there. Whether he will or not is another story, and one that depends on what he wants to be.

Since86
12-02-2012, 01:08 PM
If anyone actually expected 20 points per game from him, I have only sympathy for Paul.

No kidding.


I'm not ready to give up on Paul George. He's still just a 22 year old third year player. That's the age that a rookie is if they stay all four years in college. That's the age Roy was in his rookie season, and look how much better he's become in his mid 20's. Paul is still a very young kid in a man's league. Virtually no player in the NBA peaks at age 22. You don't know what you really have in a player until they are at least age 24-25. If Paul was playing like this in his fifth season, then yes I'd agree that he likely wasn't ever going to get much better. But he still has all the time in the world. You don't give up on a talent like Paul when they're just 22 years old unless you get some trade package that blows you away.

The problem is that this forum hyped him up way too much and had T-Mac-like expectations for him.

Before last nights game, Paul was averaging 14.3pts. Not what we wanted, and some expected obviously, but let's put it into perspective for a 3rd year player. (Assuming it stays at that level throughout the remainder of the season) Last season in his wonderful 3rd year, James Harden averaged 16.8pts, and that got him the best bench player in the NBA. Yeah, it's the bench but it also got Harden a max contract. I'm not saying Paul is on that level, I'm saying expecting 17pts would be a pretty exceptional step forward into becoming a star.

Danny's third year, he went from averaging 12pts to 19pts. That won him the MIP award. Obviously Paul's progression isn't that good, but that was the best improvement in the entire NBA. That shouldn't be the standard.

Paul averaging 14pts, while isn't a best case scenario, is still showing signs of progress. Paul has shot horribly, on shots we know he can make. If he starts just hitting a little lower than his average, that ppg will increase to 15/16. Right back at that Harden level. (who was playing 31mins a night to get that btw and PG is at 32)

No, Paul hasn't played well yet, but the fact that he's averaging 14ps while playing like crap actually gives me hope that he can keep progressing forward. If he doesn't end up as a superstar, so what? That's the best case scenario, not the standard.

EDIT: And to keep with the Harden theme (and no, I'm not comparing them) Harden also averaged 4.1rebs and 3.7assists. Paul is averaging 6.5rebs and 3.4assists.

Paul is turning into a pretty good player, and I just hope that the expectation that he should be a superstar doesn't spoil that.

Last night sucked though.

Nuntius
12-02-2012, 01:09 PM
Thompson is the same age and has been in the league a yr less than PG, and he doesn't seem to be struggling to look to shoot or score.


Thompson scored 4 points in 2/8 shooting (in 23 minutes) against OKC earlier this season.

Thompson also scored 2 points in 1/6 shooting (in 22 minutes) against Utah last season.

Gordon Hayward scored 4 points in 1/8 shooting (in 27 minutes) against Denver this season.

He also scored 4 points in 1/10 shooting (in 33 minutes) against San Antonio in Game 3 of the SAS vs Utah playoff series.

He scored 0 points in 0/7 shooting (in 25 minutes) in Game 4 of the same series.

He also had several low scoring games during the last season.

The point is that it is natural for those guys to have some low scoring games. It's also natural to have some big scoring nights. They will be more consistent as they mature.

One thing I noticed while searching basketball-reference.com for their games was that Klay Thompson seemed to be less prone to low scoring nights. But if you look at their career numbers it makes absolute sense.

Klay Thompson is averaging 11.8 FGAs per game in his career. 4.6 of those are 3 point shots. He is averaging 15.6 FGAs this season. 6.8 of those are 3 point shots.

Gordon Hayward is averaging 6.9 FGAs per game in his career. 1.9 of those are 3 point shots. He is averaging 11.1 FGAs this season. 3.3 of those are 3 point shots.

Paul George is averaging 8.7 FGAs per game in his career. 3.2 of those are 3 point shots. He is averaging 13.5 FGAs this season. 5.3 of those are 3 point shots.

So, it's pretty natural that Thompson is scoring more because he's also shooting more. He also posts the highest Usage Rate of the 3. His career USG% is 24.5%. PG's career USG% is 19.2% and Hayward's is 17.7%.

So, why is he shooting more than the other 2? Well, it's quite simple, really.

Golden State runs a perimeter-oriented system. Utah and Indiana run post-heavy offenses.

So, it's quite natural that Klay attempts (and hits) more shots than the other two. He has the green light to do so.

Hicks
12-02-2012, 01:30 PM
said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.

I think he is who he is in this regard, but you have to consider that he can still make strides as a skill/finesse player.

owl
12-02-2012, 02:03 PM
I think he is who he is in this regard, but you have to consider that he can still make strides as a skill/finesse player.

Reggie was a finesse player but he had a finesse game and was agressive. Paul needs some work.

Naptown_Seth
12-02-2012, 02:14 PM
DJ gets a C+? Another too kind grade. Someone has a man crush. Look at +/- in 1st when DJ hit the court. I told Gnome that Jack might have 20 by the half. Also said he would hit halfcourt over DJ before he did. Game over.

McKeyFan
12-02-2012, 03:34 PM
If anyone actually expected 20 points per game from him, I have only sympathy for Paul.
In an interview last year, Paul said his goal was to break the Pacers all time scoring record.

Justin Tyme
12-02-2012, 04:32 PM
Just like Roy doesn't really need to score that much. With Danny, West, and Hill we just need Roy and Paul to be complementary players.


I about choked on this statement while eating a Triscuit! I sure in the he11 would hope a player being paid the MAX is more than a complementary player. I'm sure Roy's agent didn't sell Walsh on Hibbert just being a complementary for a max contract. You can bet Portland looked at Hibbert as more than a complimentary player when offering a max contract. If that is all Hibbert needs to be then he should have been paid D Jordan and J McGee complimemtary 10 mil salary.

Eleazar
12-02-2012, 05:18 PM
I about choked on this statement while eating a Triscuit! I sure in the he11 would hope a player being paid the MAX is more than a complementary player. I'm sure Roy's agent didn't sell Walsh on Hibbert just being a complementary for a max contract. You can bet Portland looked at Hibbert as more than a complimentary player when offering a max contract. If that is all Hibbert needs to be then he should have been paid D Jordan and J McGee complimemtary 10 mil salary.

Hibbert is the anchor of the defense, and must be accounted for by all defenses. He might be a "complimentary" player on offense, but he is the most important complimentary player in the league.


With Paul his potential lies in his all-around game, not his scoring. His peak scoring wise really should be about 18ppg, and he is not the type of player you just give the ball and tell them to do his thing like so many people want him to be. While his ball handling is much improved it still isn't good enough to do that. If people would just understand the type of player Paul, instead of projecting what they want him to be (i.e. LeBron or Durant) maybe you guys will realize how much better he is than last year. The only thing preventing him from averaging 16+ppg is his career low type of shooting, which is remarkably similar to how Granger shot last year in the first month or so. George struggled on defense last night, but anyone that has watched George could have told you he was going to struggle. He struggled for the same reason he always struggles against active sharpshooters. He has improved from last year, but he still has a long way to go in that category.

George played like **** last night, but it has been the only game where he has played like **** from start to finish this season. That tends to happen when you play teams that are able to expose your biggest weakness. While he has had defensive lapses this season, he hasn't had anymore than anyone else. They are just more obvious than everyone else because we are so used to his great defense, and typically he is guarding the other teams best perimeter player. While he hasn't done a great job of scoring he has found other ways to contribute most of the season. If it wasn't for his 9 assists against Sacramento David West most likely doesn't go off for as much as he did nor do we win that game. So far he has had one game where he was not able to positively affect the game. Not bad for a third year player.

D-BONE
12-02-2012, 06:06 PM
PG 18 ppg? Nah. I'd say more like 14 is his ceiling. What we're seeing is about the best we'll get on offense, IMO. He might become more consistent though.

I want the coaching staff to tell him they want him to be a defensive stopper, and I mean a true stopper: able to play off the ball as well as on and the passing lane. Guy could be a defensive force, DPOY type. That's where his impact identity lies, so tell him to focus on that.

Then if we get some consistent O it's just gravy, and he's a great complementary player to West, Hill, Granger and (hopefully) Hibbert. But actually, Hill and Hibbert are definitely options 4 and 5. They don't have the DNA to be any more offensively.

Johanvil
12-02-2012, 06:15 PM
Can we agree that he will never have a breakout year?He will be an excellent defender but never ever a constant offensive threat.

vnzla81
12-02-2012, 06:21 PM
Can we agree that he will never have a breakout year?He will be an excellent defender but never ever a constant offensive threat.

Yep a player that's only 22 would never have a breakout year .....

avoidingtheclowns
12-02-2012, 06:37 PM
In an interview last year, Paul said his goal was to break the Pacers all time scoring record.

Slow and steady wins the race?

AesopRockOn
12-02-2012, 07:02 PM
In an interview last year, Paul said his goal was to break the Pacers all time scoring record.

Brandon Rush said he wanted to be the next Reggie. Doesn't mean I expected him to be.

Johanvil
12-02-2012, 07:05 PM
Yep a player that's only 22 would never have a breakout year .....

May sound way premature but you can see how weak he is mentally and shows no signs of consistency whatsoever.He will never become great player,a player that a team will rely on him.
I will thankfully eat a humble pie if i am proven wrong but i just can't see it.

LOL remember last year when we both said we were aspiring for Paul to become someone like Rudy Gay?Yeah,forget about that.

beast23
12-02-2012, 07:07 PM
It's not so much that the expectation for George is to score 20 ppg. The Pacers run an equal opportunity offense, therefore having a player average 20 ppg is not likely, especially when the player is at best a 3rd scoring option. But it is NOT unreasonable to expect George to start becoming more consistent in the way he plays and how he effects the box score.

Without any prior knowledge of Granger not being available, I would have expected George to provide between 10-14 points every night out, with a few 18-20 point games and a few 6-8 point games sprinkled in. When he isn't hitting his shots I would expect him to get to the line to contribute his minimum share of points. For the most part, George has contributed those points, although with Granger out, he is not contributing additional points to help compensate. Where I'm most disappointed in George offensively is in his inability to do the things he needs to do to get to the line and in the fact that I haven't seen a significant improvement in his ability to drive the ball.

Defensively, you guys can give him accolades all you want, but frankly, I am extremely disappointed. Paul George is a great on the ball defender, although like most of his teammates he oftentimes loses his man through screens. But he absolutely sucks in weak side off-the-ball defense. So many on this forum hated Dunleavy's defense because he had difficulty staying with quicker opponents. But one thing that Dunleavy did do was to play very good weak side defense.

Paul George claims to want to be a great player. Everyone talks about his work ethic, but frankly I don't see a lot of results. If you have such great athletic talents as Paul George and can literally stifle many wings in this league when you guard them man on man, then why in the hell can't you also guard them when they don't have the ball? Is anyone catching on yet? It should be very clear. Mr George lacks focus. It's that simple. He is not mentally tough enough to force himself to maintain the focus necessary to shut down his man whether or not his man has the ball. And, if you are very often guarding your opponent's best scorer, is there really anything more important for you to do on the defensive end of the floor than to take your opponent out of his offense... to prevent him from scoring?

That leads me to what I think might result in the worst of all catch-22s for the Pacers. Like a former player named Bender, George shows a ton of potential. So much so that other teams will maintain interest. This season, the Pacers have expressed faith in George and have increased their dependency on him. So, what do we do following next season when it comes time to re-sign George if he continues his current inconsistency and also is unable to provide consistent focus defensively in order to become the truly elite defender he is capable of being? Will we be forced by other teams to sign him to a Bender-sized contract of 7M-8M per year if we want to keep him, all the time still praying that he becomes a mentally tougher player and that his potential finally comes to fruition?

I've said all along that this is George's crap or get off the pot year. I think the Pacers have easily determined which post they need to hitch to. Granger is the SF, period. From my perspective at least, that question has already been decided. For me, it is now a question of who shall you keep. Do you re-sign West and know that you have your PF slot manned for another 3 years or so with an excellent player? Or, do replace West and the following year spend the bucks to keep George and continue to hope that you might have your SG slot covered? I suppose that it is entirely possible that the Pacers re-sign West and continue to wait on George, knowing they may have to trade one of the two by next year's trade deadline.

P.S. If I were Paul George, I would get out some old tape of Ron Artest's Pacers games if I wanted to know how a player is to be guarded away from the ball.

Justin Tyme
12-02-2012, 07:17 PM
I want the coaching staff to tell him they want him to be a defensive stopper, and I mean a true stopper: able to play off the ball as well as on and the passing lane. Guy could be a defensive force, DPOY type. That's where his impact identity lies, so tell him to focus on that.

Sounds like McKey 2.

CableKC
12-02-2012, 07:19 PM
I've said all along that this is George's crap or get off the pot year. I think the Pacers have easily determined which post they need to hitch to. Granger is the SF, period. From my perspective at least, that question has already been decided. For me, it is now a question of who shall you keep. Do you re-sign West and know that you have your PF slot manned for another 3 years or so with an excellent player? Or, do replace West and the following year spend the bucks to keep George and continue to hope that you might have your SG slot covered? I suppose that it is entirely possible that the Pacers re-sign West and continue to wait on George, knowing they may have to trade one of the two by next year's trade deadline.

P.S. If I were Paul George, I would get out some old tape of Ron Artest's Pacers games if I wanted to know how a player is to be guarded away from the ball.
I am more inclined to believe that the FO would re-sign PG to an extension ( or matching whatever he gets on the RFA market ), re-signing West and then looking to trade Granger between now ( unlikely ) and the 2013-2014 Trade Deadline is the most likely scenario. This isn't because Granger isn't the better Player....it's more that this is the more cost effective option than signing Granger and West ( both older Players ) to big contracts and the simply moving PG ( a SG ) for another SG ( that is cheap ).

billbradley
12-02-2012, 08:29 PM
Paul George: F-
His trade value will never be higher.
I was tempted to just leave it at that but his game is so putrid right now that I feel the need to add this. I never want to hear another word about moving Granger so Paul George can play his natural position of small forward. I knew at the time his 37 point game was pyrite and I said so after the game. Will he get better? Well frankly he has to, I donít know if itís possible to play worse. Hell Roy in his worst games of the season still somehow scored a point. Heís starting to make me miss Brandon Rush and I donít even like Brandon Rush. Hereís a fun fact, he has now played in 17 games and has only shot a total of 33 free throws.

When PG had his 37 point night, we were at the game and of course it was exciting. But when my girlfriend said something about how great it was, I told her I would trade those 37 points on 3's for a 20 point game all going to basket in a second.

His play in the Warriors game was about as bad as it gets for a guy with his talents. Your shot not falling? Get to the basket and play great D. Yet he still floated around the arc and Klay was killing us.

billbradley
12-02-2012, 08:30 PM
P.S. If I were Paul George, I would get out some old tape of Ron Artest's Pacers games if I wanted to know how a player is to be guarded away from the ball.

I would also ask Ron how a terrible dribbler gets to the rim.

Trader Joe
12-02-2012, 08:46 PM
Paul George is a slightly more skilled Derrick McKey, sure I would trade him in the right package

The problem Peck and a lot of other people are having is they thought Paul would lead us in scoring even though that never really seemed in the cards. Peck, I believe you said Paul would average 19-20 per game at the forum party, so I can see why you are upset, but I told you then at Perkins that it wasn't realistic. If he continues to still gives us 14 ppg, 7 rpg, and 3 apg, with a couple steals and a blcok night, he is still one of the better two way wing players you will find, especially on a rookie deal. Sure, I would shop Paul, but right now I would shop pretty much anyone on the team in the right deal, Paul gives great production for his current contract, so if you're upset with him, well I think you just need to look no further than what were probably unrealistic expectations in the first place. The guy is most likely never going to average 18-20 ppg, that is hard to do in the NBA, Danny Granger is able to do it barely and his offensive game is miles ahead of Paul's.

Trader Joe
12-02-2012, 08:53 PM
Funny how the Danny Grangers fan club members and Danny Granger excuse makers are the ones that want to trade Paul George because "is enough of excuse making" lol, yeah let's trade the guy with the must potential and let's keep Danny and West for the future because "they are guys that play like old mans so they should be able to play for at least 5 more years" .....


At this point I'm hoping they trade him for another "old man game" type of player to see what this same people are going to say when Paul George is kicking a$$ on another team and the Pacers are in rebuilding mode once again.

Paul will never "kick ***" on another team. I think Paul is largely who he is at this point and THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. The problem is that because he was a tall athletic guy on the wing he somehow drew Tracy McGrady comparisons which were INSANE. Paul barely scored 16 ppg in the WAC on really bad percentages. He's just not an offensive dynamo.

There's a reason a lot of us drooled over the potential of a wing combo involving a healthy Eric Gordon (a pipe dream at this point obviously) and Paul George. Gordon is really good at all the stuff is not good at, while also being pretty good in the areas Paul is really good at. Health, and personnel situations have rendered this pairing impossible, but a healthy Eric Gordon and Paul George would probably be the best wing combo in the NBA, but like I said just not going to happen.

The point isn't that Paul sucks or is sucking, yes he's had a bad pair of games offensively, but that is the type of player he is and always will be.

Instead of people just admitting that they set the bar for Paul WAY TOO HIGH, they would rather say Paul isn't living up to his potential, well I vehemently disagree, and I'm sad to see this happening because I said it would happen when people started tossing the T-Mac comps around. Paul is EXACTLY the guy I thought he would be back in the Chicago series, a really decent two way wing, who can get hot from outside and give you 30 point nights, but for the most part is a really average offensive player that plays smothering D rebounds better than any other 2 in the league pretty much and is also an above average passer when you put him in low pressure passing situations. Don't blame the player if you're mad at Paul, blame your expectations that were just way off base. And Vnzla, this is not directed at you, I was just replying to your post since it is not a Danny Granger vs. Paul George thing, it is an unreasonable expectations Paul Goerge vs. Real Paul George thing.

And Paul may still explode and become a 20 ppg guy, but that should be a surprise for anyone who has watched him, not what is expected.

docpaul
12-02-2012, 10:57 PM
Agree with a lot of the frustration with PG... but then, I saw this:

http://instagram.com/p/SwdgUunMqA/


Put up 500 jump shots.. #NewRoutine gotta get my s*** back!

:)

3rdStrike
12-03-2012, 12:11 AM
Agree with a lot of the frustration with PG... but then, I saw this:

http://instagram.com/p/SwdgUunMqA/



:)

Ugh, I bet they were all 3's! I'd be more excited by 500 layups.

Trader Joe, you say people shouldn't be disappointed because their expectations are high. Then you go and say he's exactly what you thought he'd be, and that includes playing "smothering D." Considering that often has not been the case, I'd say you should count yourself among the disappointed (or change your statement).

D-BONE
12-03-2012, 05:17 AM
Ugh, I bet they were all 3's! I'd be more excited by 500 layups.

Trader Joe, you say people shouldn't be disappointed because their expectations are high. Then you go and say he's exactly what you thought he'd be, and that includes playing "smothering D." Considering that often has not been the case, I'd say you should count yourself among the disappointed (or change your statement).

His D at times has been good, but overall it's inconsistent, effectively like the rest of his game. Personally, I'd prefer he establish consistency on defense first. Make his defense his calling card. Aspire to develop into a DPOY candidate. This would mean better off the ball D, of course. His highest ceiling given his skills set is on the defensive side of the ball. Offense should only be looked at as complementary and he should be told to take the ball to the basket more frequently and ditch the 3 and develop his midrange game.

Sollozzo
12-03-2012, 07:02 AM
said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.

I don't believe for a second that you can't become mentally tougher as you age. In fact, I think most players become more more mentally savvy as they get older. Part of being tough mentally is having confidence, and getting experience and succeeding over a period of years is going to give you more confidence.

I'm too young to have watched the Pacers when we had the Chuck Person - Reggie Miller tandem. But if IIRC, ChicagoJ has mentioned before that Reggie lacked killer instinct in the early part of his career and that it was Chuck Person who would take the big shots. Sorry if I'm putting words in ChiJ's mouth, but I'm pretty sure he has said that multiple times.

CJ Jones
12-04-2012, 12:52 AM
His D at times has been good, but overall it's inconsistent, effectively like the rest of his game. Personally, I'd prefer he establish consistency on defense first. Make his defense his calling card. Aspire to develop into a DPOY candidate. This would mean better off the ball D, of course. His highest ceiling given his skills set is on the defensive side of the ball. Offense should only be looked at as complementary and he should be told to take the ball to the basket more frequently and ditch the 3 and develop his midrange game.

It seems like when he's struggling offensively he lets it affect his defense. It drives me crazy.

People are overreacting to Paul's play early on this season. He can easily be an 18-20 ppg scorer in his prime if developed the right way. I believe his problems are mostly mental. He still has all the tools to be a really good/borderline all-star player in this league. Just think... he's never had the opportunity to play with a real PG, SG, or any good passers besides our bigs. He was dicked around by Jimmy the first half of his rookie season. His only full season he had 19% usage rate and was the last option on offense. He still rarely has plays called for him, and even when one is called the play is so obvious or the screen never gets set, and it doesn't works properly. When's the last time we saw Paul come off a pin down screen for an open mid range jumper like Curry and Thompson were getting last game? Yeah never.

He's got to get tougher minded if he want's to be as good as he can be, but like the guy above me said, that will come with age and experience.

Naptown_Seth
12-04-2012, 01:21 AM
I don't believe for a second that you can't become mentally tougher as you age. In fact, I think most players become more more mentally savvy as they get older. Part of being tough mentally is having confidence, and getting experience and succeeding over a period of years is going to give you more confidence.

I'm too young to have watched the Pacers when we had the Chuck Person - Reggie Miller tandem. But if IIRC, ChicagoJ has mentioned before that Reggie lacked killer instinct in the early part of his career and that it was Chuck Person who would take the big shots. Sorry if I'm putting words in ChiJ's mouth, but I'm pretty sure he has said that multiple times.
Forget players, plenty of people in all walks of life get more mentally tough. In fact discipline, perseverance, and a greater sense of personal responsibility are all trademarks of moving from the early 20's to the early 30's, even without having kids.

I don't think Reggie lacked the guts, he always was brash and thought highly of his own game. But when he met the ego that was Rifleman he took a back seat and it was very clear that Chuck was the alpha dog. See the 1991 Pacers-Celtics series, see the Chuck head nodding back-peddle after dropping a bomb.

We might well get to a day where everyone remembers this as how Paul George was always the man and how they all knew and always said "he had that special knack".

As far as I can tell this board is about 35% full of people that would have traded Reggie for Glen Rice in 1992 and never looked back, and I mean people that are now frustrated that Paul isn't more like Reggie.


Paul IS inconsistent, his mind wanders during games, he's not always careful with the ball or with his coverage. But he does work hard and isn't really lazy, just careless. He's not killing it, but it's way too early on for him to have a "light bulb" moment. I'd expect it closer to March of this season, or maybe not even till 2-3 months into next season. Now if we are still discussing this in 16 months then I'm much more open to the criticism.