I miss Lance. GG isn't getting it done.
Unless "it" is jacking up threes.
Lance is valuable cause he creates. He is also a one man fastbreak, if the other team misses and we got the rebound give it to Lance and he is gone! Thats why i really like Lance because he can create for himself and for others. Passing is also natural to him
My opinion is that Lance is better than Gerald Green and Sam Young at pretty much every facet of the game. However he is not, IMHO, in the same league as Paul George and Danny Granger.
The minute Danny is healthy, Lance should go to the bench and take over the offense. He'd be the 6th man this team has been missing all year.
My thoughts without Lance was we need him in the game for some times for scoring and his improving defense. I have thought since he has started that our bench will really improve with Lance coming off with energy and a scorer's mentality that will make our bench settle into their roles once Danny is back. I was a Lance doubter going into the season, but I think that with his maturity and improved decision making turned me over to really liking the kid.
Lance shouldn't start when Granger comes back but Vogel needs to get him some experience and have him finishing some games in the regular season.
Come playoff time when the 4th quarter defensive intensity amps up and the play gets physical his ability to get his own shot, draw fouls and get to places on the floor where he can create for others will be very valuable.
A lot of good reasons have been given for why we miss Lance, and I'd like to add one: His attitude. The guy doesn't back down, gets fired up, and goes after the other team. Without Granger we really don't have anyone that can handle the ball with that killer mentality (West has it, but you have to set him up a bit more).
I absolutely love it when you can see Lance getting fired up, then grabbing a rebound and pushing it up the floor right at his defender.
Honestly, I'm just happy that he's become such a valuable part of our team, as he has always seemed to be a wildcard. I started becoming a Lance fan after he nearly had his head ripped off in the Miami series by dip**** Dexter Pittman, and completely kept his cool. I'm happy that he's now playing a bit more under control, within the offense, and really isn't forcing anything. Unfortunately, his shot is off, but he isn't forcing up bad shots.
Count me in the "miss him" group, but I'm confident that Young can cover that 2 spot til he returns.
Our team is starting to win games with regularity because of the contributions we're getting from the "1" and "4" at both ends of the court, and the "5" defensively (maybe those guys will start hitting shots soon?). Not the wing.
Sixers, with Evan Turner and Jason Richarsdon?
Raptors, with DeRozan and Pietrus?
Cavs, with Waiters and Gee?
Pistons, with Knight and Prince?
Bucks, with Ellis and Mbah a Moute?
Bobcats, with Ben Gordon and Gerald Henderson?
Magic, with Afflalo and Turkoglu?
Wizards, with Crawford and Ariza?
Hornets, with Xavier Henry and Ryan Anderson?
Blazers, with Wes Mathews and Nic Batum?
Jazz, with Randy Foye and Gordon Hayward?
Warriors, with Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes?
Pheonix Suns, with Shannon Brown and Michael Beasley?
That's 13 teams. So if I give you 3 right off the bat (Wow, Anthem, how could you not know that players X, Y, and Z are blowing up this year?), that's still ten teams with worse starting wings than us. If so, that means we're not even in the bottom third. Saying "we've got the absolute worst wing rotation in the league, and will until Danny comes back" means that you don't think any of these are even close. Would you trade Paul George and Lance Stephenson for Shannon Brown and Michael Beasley? Would that net us more wins? How about Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes? Randy Foye and Gordon Hayward? All three of those are an easy "No" for me, but I admit it's possible I'm biased.
I get what you're saying.
5 games ago, those were absolutely the right teams to be comparing our wings to. Now Paul George has helped his case quite a bit but I'm taking a longer-term view.
I don't think our wings are helping us much. In fact, I think our wings are making it harder for Hill, West and Hibbert, our three best and most important players, to do their things.
Again, Paul George has been completely different since that Chicago game, so the trend is definitely up.
But good gracious, they started from "the only place to go is up." And not that long ago.
I think from the outside looking in that the Pacers' current wing situation, with our without Lance, is not striking fear throughout the league. It is probably barely registered on the respect meter. Yes, people are going to start to notice Paul George (and once they start scouting him as a larger component of the offense, it will be interesting to see how that impacts his continued development.) But its not like HE'S getting much help from the other wing spot either.
We're set at 1, 4 and 5. Remember how we talk about how it should be easier to get quality wings than points, C's, or PFs? Well, we've done the hard part but we only have two quality wings on the payroll, and one of them is out for most of the season.
To be clear....I'm not suggesting that he shouldn't pass the ball....I'm saying that if he learned when to kick it out and when to finish while balancing his "offensive attack'", he'd do much better.
Either way, if we're already missing Granger, then I'd much rather have Lance available than have him missing.
It's funny, even in this thread, we have people talking about how bad Indiana is.
13-11, certainly not what anyone expected. However, we did lose Danny on the eve of the season. Ok, so how big of a deal was that?
3-6 in the first 9 games, struggling with an identity offensively, no one hitting shots except West. Hmmmm, Granger is sure missed. However, things have to get better, right? Once the team gets used to playing without him?
10-5 in the last 15. Offense is looking a bit better, Paul George has stepped up, Roy has started playing better than his CAREER WORST start to the season.
Here's my point: If we say it took 9 games for Frank and co to figure out how to play without Danny, then things look pretty good. This team is CLEARLY trending up, and there are legitimate reasons for the slow start.
I think there is a bit of "forest through the trees" situation going on. The Pacers have been one of the better teams in the East over the past 15, yet the bad start has caused fans to gloss over that fact in favor of a "the sky is falling" mindset.
Count me as one of the guys that think this team could manage a top 5-6 seed without Danny, and jump to the top 2/3 with him back. A healthy Danny, effective Roy/Paul, consistent West, and Hill distributing makes this team a nightmare for Eastern teams to face in the playoffs. The top notch defense will cause problems for anyone in the East.
I probably should have added a hyperbole warning. Literally 30th or making a bold statement to make a point that I'm not impressed with our wings? You decide. I'm okay with either.
Agree I'd rather have Lance than be further shorthanded.
I think Danny (healthy)/ Paul/ Lance/ either Green or Young is at best an average wing rotation for an NBA team. If you toss out positions and just call them all wings, Danny might be in the top 20 (1/3) of all wings in the league, and Paul might be in the top 30 (1/2). I know that Pacers fans will group them with similar wing players and rank them higher than non-Pacers fans would, so many here will disagree with me ranking both of them that low. That's fine. We can agree to disagree. Paul may move up higher as he's young and has potential, and that's good. Especially if he can throw together another 55 games that are similar to his last five.
I just don't think our wings are (a) all that good, or (b) all that important to our success. So my thoughts on two games without Lance, as the thread asks, is that our wings are probably not as good without him, but in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. We get Danny back and our wings will be better, but not to the point that our wings are the source of our roster's strength. Our rotation's highlights and our team's key to success are at the point and the post positions, not the wings.
And IMO we're starting to win with more regularity because of our top three guys - Hill, West, Hibbert.
Lance is just an athlete. If he learns discipline like PG has, he could be a real special player
I don't care what you call Hill. Point, combo, just a guard, whatever. He's not a prototype PG but he's a playmaker. And he's a better playmaker than just about any other point guard we've had in blue and gold over the past couple of decades.
Maybe the passing game doesn't look crisp in the second quarter, but when he's got the ball at crunch time you expect good things to happen.
This ain't Travis Best or Ford just dribbling out the game clock to get a contested shot swatted into the stands.
And this ain't a couple of passes around the perimeter to find somebody to shoot a three.
There's a pick and roll coming and its got all four of the legit options because Hill can make it work - keep the ball himself (floater), get the ball to the West if the defense switches, get the ball to the weakside post if the defense collapses and get the ball to the wing if the defender fights through. When have we had that kind of point and post versatility in crunch time? Even when Danny comes back, I don't ever want to see him take another crunch time 3-pointer ever again (unless we're actually down by 3.)
I don't care what position you call him, and I don't really care about his stats. Hill is making great contributions to this team's success.
Fine. We're 29th?
Fine, let's just look in our division.
Cleveland: Gee, Miles, Waiters, Walton
Detroit: Prince, Stuckey, Singler, Maggette
Milwaukee: Ellis, Daniels, Dunleavy, Lamb
Chicago: Deng, Belinelli, Hamilton, Butler
Have you watched any of these rotations play extensively this season? I'd take Granger/George/Stephen/anyone over every one of those combos.
I don't understand how Granger and Paul George can play as well as they have, yett we're only set at 1, 4, and 5. Hibbert has been slightly above average at best. I realize post and point are higher impact positions, but Hibbert has done nothing for us offensively. Meanwhile, George is getting it done on both ends and Granger is our biggest offensive threat when he comes back.
Even without Danny I count at least 7 starting wings that are worse.