Overall I don't think turnovers are as big of an issue as many make them out to be.
Looking at the team stats for turnovers there would appear to be no correlation between winning and the number of turnovers a team commits.
Let look at some of the top teams
Rockets - 29th in the NBA at 15.6 per game
OKC - 28th in the NBA at 15.3 per game
Warriors - 26th in the NBA at 15.2
Phoenix - 24th at 14.8
Bulls - 21st at 14.7
Pacers - 20th at 14.6
Spurs - 19th at 14.5
Heat - 16th at 14.4
Blazers - 9th at 13.6
Raptors - 7th at 13.5
Clippers 7th at 13.5
Mavs - 4th at 13.0
Grizzles 3rd at 12.7
So where is the correlation. I don't see it. And how many times have you heard that OKC is commiting too many turnovers or that the heat and Spurs who are basically committing as many as the pacers are committing too many. 6 of the best teams in the NBA are in the lowest 1/3 in committing turnovers.
I mean sure it is better to committ fewer, but the correlation between being a team that commits few turnovers and being a top team - I don't see it.
I expect someone to muddy the waters and suggest that because of the pace the Pacers play at it really is a problem.
I think a much bigger problem is shooting percentage. Only teams to shoot worse than the Pacers at the Knicks, Nets, Cavs, Magic, Grizzlies, Celtics, Bobcats, Jazz, Bucks, and Bulls.
Where as the top ten teams are the Clippers, Blazers, Rockets, T-wolves, OKC, Suns, Spurs, Mavs, Heat and Warriors.
There are no elite teams that rank less than 10th in FG shooting percentage and the pacers are 20th. No other elite team ranks below 10th. That is our problem offensively. Our ability to get good shots and make shots - but it isn't turnovers.