Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

  1. #1
    Member adamscb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Peoria, IL
    Age
    22
    Posts
    579

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Before I say anything, let me get something straight: I'm not disappointed at all in George Hill's play as the starting point guard.

    Okay, so I'm starting to believe that Stephenson should start at the one. He has that uncanny ability to see things before they happen and make the incredible pass. And what's even more impressive is his ability to do this almost every time he gets the ball. I remember early in the first quarter Stephenson had what like 4 or 5 assists in a row? This also means that GHill plays at the SG spot, his natural position. The only downside I see of this is Hill might be a defensive liability against the larger two guards. What is PD's thoughts?

  2. #2

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    No, not yet.

    At some point in the future, probably. But right now his attention span tends to wander.

  3. #3
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    I don't see a point in declaring him a PG at this stage; he and Hill are both going to start, let them both do whatever they feel they do best that night. Lately, that means Lance is more of a 1 on offense and 2 on defense, and Hill the opposite. I think we should just keep it as-is.

  4. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  5. #4

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    If it's not broke . . . .
    Can we get a new color commentator please?

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Reggie4Three For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    future dragon trainer Heisenberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    12,050

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Soooo we'd be changing what? Why do people think Hill handles the ball 95% of the time he's on the floor or something? We're 24-5, this has gotta stop. Dude puts up 21/4/4 on 10 shots with no TOs in an easy win and we still get this.

  8. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Heisenberg For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  9. #6
    Member adamscb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Peoria, IL
    Age
    22
    Posts
    579

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Quote Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Soooo we'd be changing what? Why do people think Hill handles the ball 95% of the time he's on the floor or something? We're 24-5, this has gotta stop. Dude puts up 21/4/4 on 10 shots with no TOs in an easy win and we still get this.
    Read my first sentence.

  10. #7
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,822

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    I dont see the need. With how our offense is built, Lance has the ball plenty, I don't see a move to the 1 changing that really. The more good plays Lance makes, the more he will get the ball, regardless of playing the 1 or 2.

    I like the calm and collected Hill at the 1 as well. Feels more controlled. Lance is a creator, but that doesn't mean he is a point guard.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  12. #8
    Gold Stagger Hoop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Greenwood
    Posts
    4,520
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    This question and/or similar ones have already been asked to death.

    I think he'd have to much trouble guarding smaller quicker PG's. IMO Lance is not a PG and never will be a long term starter at that position.

    He's a GREAT passer at the 2 guard spot, what's wrong with just being that?
    "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG"

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Hoop For This Useful Post:


  14. #9
    future dragon trainer Heisenberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    12,050

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Quote Originally Posted by adamscb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Read my first sentence.
    So why change what's made us the best team in the league? The hell of it?

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Heisenberg For This Useful Post:


  16. #10
    Welcome CJ Miles! BlueCollarColts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3,603

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Technically I think he is. Like Vogel said, in our system, we have guards, wings, and big men. Paul George is a wing, and Stephenson and Hill are guards. I don't feel like either of them are our point guard, they both split the duties at the position, but Lance has really been our main PG this season, as evident of his 5.2 apg compared to Hill's 3.6

  17. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to BlueCollarColts For This Useful Post:


  18. #11
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    18,860

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    No. Our offense revolves around our wings and thus I want Lance to remain a wing because I want the ball in his hands. Putting him at the PG spot could probably result in getting the ball away from his hands and that's something that we don't want.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  19. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    I'm loving aggressive Hill I hope he stays aggressive.

    And regarding the question I doesn't make sense to fix it.

  20. #13

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    24-5

  21. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PacersHomer For This Useful Post:


  22. #14

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Let's decide to call Lance the starting PG and call Hill the starting SG, with no changes in the lineups or rotations!

    my point: It just doesn't matter.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  23. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Slick Pinkham For This Useful Post:


  24. #15
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,454

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    I don't care about labels. I care about an effective back court in which both players have very strong roles. Is Lance the starting PG? No. Does he do a lot of PGish things as it stands? Definitely.

    We don't need to shake anything up now. Both Hill and Lance have big strengths that are working perfectly the way they are now.

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  26. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,644

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    I really don't know why some still don't realize that the Pacers operate outside the norm.we have a traditional power forward and center, but that is about it. We have a small forward who brings the ball up court on occasion.

    But our guards operate differently from most of the other guard combinations in the league. I know that the Pacers believe that they have transformed George Hill from an excellent 6th man shooting guard from San Antonio to a starting point guard for the Pacers. And, Larry Bird believes that Lance is well on his way to being a great starting point guard in the NBA, hopefully for the Pacers.

    From my perspective, we really don't have a shooting guard and a point guard. We simply have two darned good starting guards. I suppose with the current vernacular, we have two really good combo-guards. Personally, I'm done with trying to associate a more specific label on either player. It doesn't matter one bit what we call them, they are going to continue in exactly the same roles that they are in right now.

    Either one is able to bring the ball up the court, along with Paul George. Either one can initiate or facilitate the offense. Both can drive the ball or shoot the ball. George Hill is a good passer who does not press the envelope in the passes he attempts, whereas Lance is the more capable one of threading the needle with a pinpoint pass. But who cares? The both perform all functions of both the point guard and shooting guard positions whenever they are on the floor together. Does it really make sense any longer to continue the effort of pigeon-holing either to one label or the other?

    Edit:

    Or whatever Sollozzo said with far fewer words.

  27. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to beast23 For This Useful Post:


  28. #17
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,978

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Until Granger fully recovers, this is a non-issue. Hill and Lance fit perfectly together as it is.

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to BlueNGold For This Useful Post:


  30. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Quote Originally Posted by beast23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I really don't know why some still don't realize that the Pacers operate outside the norm.we have a traditional power forward and center, but that is about it. We have a small forward who brings the ball up court on occasion.

    But our guards operate differently from most of the other guard combinations in the league. I know that the Pacers believe that they have transformed George Hill from an excellent 6th man shooting guard from San Antonio to a starting point guard for the Pacers. And, Larry Bird believes that Lance is well on his way to being a great starting point guard in the NBA, hopefully for the Pacers.

    From my perspective, we really don't have a shooting guard and a point guard. We simply have two darned good starting guards. I suppose with the current vernacular, we have two really good combo-guards. Personally, I'm done with trying to associate a more specific label on either player. It doesn't matter one bit what we call them, they are going to continue in exactly the same roles that they are in right now.

    Either one is able to bring the ball up the court, along with Paul George. Either one can initiate or facilitate the offense. Both can drive the ball or shoot the ball. George Hill is a good passer who does not press the envelope in the passes he attempts, whereas Lance is the more capable one of threading the needle with a pinpoint pass. But who cares? The both perform all functions of both the point guard and shooting guard positions whenever they are on the floor together. Does it really make sense any longer to continue the effort of pigeon-holing either to one label or the other?
    I'm not sure about that, actually what the Pacers do a lot of teams are doing, Phoenix with Dragic/Bledsoe, NO with Jrue/EJ, Dallas with Calderon/Monta, etc, I'm not sure were this operating outside the norm thing is coming from because is actually the norm.

  31. #19

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Quote Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Soooo we'd be changing what? Why do people think Hill handles the ball 95% of the time he's on the floor or something? We're 24-5, this has gotta stop. Dude puts up 21/4/4 on 10 shots with no TOs in an easy win and we still get this.
    We are still "getting this" because Lance is crazy good and hasn't even reached his ceiling yet. By the end of the season, we could be having a legit conversation about Lance being the team MVP. Yeah, some of the triple doubles that people get are by luck, but Lance is turning into a legit triple double threat because he has a nose for the ball. Funny thing is...it's usually the points that come last, so he is rebounding and dishing it out almost equally well. I'm going to watch the re-broadcast; I'm sure he should have had another triple double tonight, as I counted 1 rebound that he acquiesced on, and at least a couple of shots should have gone down to give him a few more assists. I'm also tempted to try to look up the record for triple doubles in a season. Lance is likely to not come close to breaking that record, but I'm curious, and more so, I'd like to see how young the big triple-double players were when they fully developed their games.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to joeyd For This Useful Post:


  33. #20
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    16,938

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Glad we brought this up. Been giving it a lot of thought, and I think we should take this a step further: Let's start Hibbert at the point, but have him guard the opposing centers on defense. Matchup nightmare! Then we start Lance at the 5 because seriously how many other teams have that kind of versatility out of their starting centers? He would blow by guys! He still guards the opposing two guard though. This puts Hill at small forward because he is better suited to spot up shoot and tie things together on the wing, so this is the most versatile position for him. He continues to guard opposing point guards though. This puts PG at the 4. He's 6'10, plenty of size to play the position, but with his shooting he would stretch the court and drag opposing power forwards on the perimeter. Foolproof!* He still guards the opposing small forward though. At last, the final piece to our matchup nightmare for opponents: David West at shooting guard. Most SGs are too small to block his shot and he could overpower them on offense all day (you see what he did to the smaller Shane Battier!!) He continues to guard the opposing power forwards though.



    *(Jim O'Brien was a consultant on this)

  34. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to cdash For This Useful Post:


  35. #21
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,822

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm not sure about that, actually what the Pacers do a lot of teams are doing, Phoenix with Dragic/Bledsoe, NO with Jrue/EJ, Dallas with Calderon/Monta, etc, I'm not sure were this operating outside the norm thing is coming from because is actually the norm.
    I agree. A lot of it is due to the lack of true point guards any more as well. There are just a lot of combo guards. Or "scoring point guards"

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  37. #22
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,822

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    Quote Originally Posted by cdash View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Glad we brought this up. Been giving it a lot of thought, and I think we should take this a step further: Let's start Hibbert at the point, but have him guard the opposing centers on defense. Matchup nightmare! Then we start Lance at the 5 because seriously how many other teams have that kind of versatility out of their starting centers? He would blow by guys! He still guards the opposing two guard though. This puts Hill at small forward because he is better suited to spot up shoot and tie things together on the wing, so this is the most versatile position for him. He continues to guard opposing point guards though. This puts PG at the 4. He's 6'10, plenty of size to play the position, but with his shooting he would stretch the court and drag opposing power forwards on the perimeter. Foolproof!* He still guards the opposing small forward though. At last, the final piece to our matchup nightmare for opponents: David West at shooting guard. Most SGs are too small to block his shot and he could overpower them on offense all day (you see what he did to the smaller Shane Battier!!) He continues to guard the opposing power forwards though.



    *(Jim O'Brien was a consultant on this)
    I did see Hibbert hit a fadeaway three once...

  38. #23
    BornRodney ECKrueger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Age
    23
    Posts
    3,918

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    As has been said, we do not have a point and shooting guard, we have two guards that combine to do both jobs.

  39. The Following User Says Thank You to ECKrueger For This Useful Post:


  40. #24
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    16,938

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    To the OP: My comment was (obviously) in jest. I wasn't trying to belittle your premise or anything. I am of the, "if it ain't broke..." crowd, as well as the group that thinks with the way our offense is structured, it really doesn't matter who starts where.

  41. #25
    BornRodney ECKrueger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Age
    23
    Posts
    3,918

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Should Stephenson start at the 1?

    The 1 and 2, along with 2 and 3 are pretty much interchangeable for Frank I believe.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •