Anybody else notice that Hill doesn't seem to like to pass Lance the ball?
“People talk about how quiet he [McKey] is, but he’s really been helpful. He gives a lot of insight to players in how to guard certain teams and what their weaknesses are. The whole team listens to him, and it makes my job a lot easier. Having players like him is what pro basketball is all about for me.” —Larry Brown
Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.
- Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
- Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
- Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.
Enjoy your time at PD!
I have no proof of this, but I get the feeling it's more like Hill/PG will run the play that Vogel calls no matter what, whereas Lance will get it to the guy in the best position to score no matter what. Hill is a system/structure guy (which is why he was the only one having success in the first week), and Lance is a playmaker.
here is my question, who has a better chance at being a star in this league, Lance Stephenson or Paul George?
If he isn't already, Lance must be pretty close to our best 'broken plays' creator. As such would like to see him as the preferred option late in the clock. The reason everyone gets excited when he has the ball in his hands is not solely because of his unpredictability and showmanship but his quality as a shot creator - either for himself or team mates. The downside is that he sometimes forces it, the upside is that he possess a raw but near unique skill-set for this roster as constructed.
"He's a strong physical presence out there on both ends of the court. He's a man. There's a reason he was an All-Star." -- Vogel on David West
Hill and Lance together should make for a good pair since both are interchangeable.
Lance + Starting SG = Awesome
Now really free Lance!
There's nothing wrong with having a two be the primary ballhandler on a team.
Scott Agness @ScottAgness
30 minutes after shootaround, @StephensonLance is still on the court, by himself, getting shots up. http://twitpic.com/bf67ui
I'll be happy as long as Lance is a permanent fixture in the starting lineup.
He can be our PG by playing at the "2" too.All you need is don't let Hill setting up the offense and let the clock wind down to 11 to initiate it.
As for Lance,he's probably the only bright thing about our season.He still overhits some shots but all in all he has been very good.
Last edited by Johanvil; 11-23-2012 at 04:40 PM.
Lance fits as a 6th man on this team or a starter with Granger out. In either case, he will be on the floor a lot with starters as long as he continues to develop.
I must say he has changed my opinion of him. Specifically his commitment to getting better, his ability to defend and his off court record. It's all been good and I will take my lumps for misjudging him.
Guy's playing the best basketball of his life, by a gigantic margin, and we should screw with it. Gotta love message boards!