The Pacers Core (a clinic in how to build without tanking)

[daschysta]

The Pacers were not missing their leading scorer from last year like they have all year. The Pacers also didn't recently come off the leagues only back to back to back game where they ended up playing 4 games in 5 nights before they played brooklyn.

.. maan. The Paces are only elite defensively and are second in the conference so far despite a major injury only because they're frauds.

we had tyshon taylor and reggie evans starting! dwill was out and we were on a back to back as well and we play ZERO defense and you still lose and didnt break 80 points... and even if you want to make excuses for that game we beat you by 15-20 the previous meeting.

2nd in the east is a joke, the conference is terrible and there are what like 4 teams within a game or two of the pacers?

fraud team.

Which was on a back to back game... The Pacer's 3rd game in 4 nights.....again without their leading scorer from last year.

so basically, the pacers are the only team who plays on back to back nights and its unheard ofr for a team to win on a back to back?

got it thanks. nets dont play defense, only beat horrible sub .500 teams, we didint have OUR leading scorer from last year(dwill) and still won. that should tell you all you need to know about your fraud fugazy team.[/quote]

Actually we are the only team in the NBA to play a back to back to back this season, and were clearly worn out. You didn't have a guy one night, we haven't had ours all year long. The Pacers smash the Nets in point differential, SRS, record vs. .500+ teams. There is not a single metric that suggests the Nets as of now are as good of a basketball team as the Pacers. Winning a few games head to head is irrelevant, especially when you consider the circumstances, if regular season games really were that important then everyone should be predicting the Pacers will sweep the Heat, because we've destroyed them twice this season. So congrats on beating an exhausted Pacers team and another that we were blowing you out in and just let get away, you appear to be clinging on to them, which is understandable, since it's one of the very few wins against a quality team you have.

[thug-lyfe]

Question for Pacers fans, do you think Paul George can continue his spectacular production at the SG spot with Granger in the lineup? I noticed George broke out this year being a SF with Granger out.

Also, how are you guys loving Lance Stephenson? He's turning out to be a stud. 6'5, great handles, good playmaking, good shooting, good defense and built like a tank? Do you think he could be more than what he is currently as a player?

[Jake0890]

Question though to Indy fans...what is up with the terrible attendance? You guys are a basketball state with a good team.

Honestly, I'm not sure. I think most Indiana basketball fans would rather watch IU than the Pacers. I personally find college basketball much more exciting, so I can see why.

But I don't think it helps that not too long ago we had the thug-team including Jamaal Tinsley and Ron Artest, and they all had bad attitudes and were a pain to watch.

I think it'll improve though. Pacers are only getting better, no matter what PetroNet or any other blind ignorant hater tells you.

[Jake0890]

Question for Pacers fans, do you think Paul George can continue his spectacular production at the SG spot with Granger in the lineup? I noticed George broke out this year being a SF with Granger out.

Also, how are you guys loving Lance Stephenson? He's turning out to be a stud. 6'5, great handles, good playmaking, good shooting, good defense and built like a tank? Do you think he could be more than what he is currently as a player?

I don't think Vogel will ever move Paul George back to SG. He is just so much more comfortable playing SF. I would assume Granger comes off the bench to play both the 3 and 4 positions.

Lance Stephenson has been an incredible surprise. It's been nice to see why Larry Bird stuck with him for so long. As for potential, I'm not sure. He's still young, and can get better, but I'm not exactly sure how much better. Another 2nd round pick, Orlando Johnson, has been spectacular for where he was drafted. The kid looks really good.

[daschysta]

I love how much hate this Nets fan is giving the Pacers.

The Pacers have a better record than the Nets without their leading scorer all season. You keep saying your 2-0 against us so that means we are pretenders, yet we are 2-0 against Miami, what does that make them? I'm not sure why the Nets feel like they've earned the right to talk trash all of a sudden, but its cute.

Come playoff time, the Pacers would beat the Nets in 5-6. The Pacers and Bulls(with healthy Rose) are the only two teams in the East to even have a shot against Miami.

the pacers are frauds who arent beating anyone in the playoffs.... your best shot would be against us, but that doesnt say much cause we are a joke of a team ourselves

Indiana started teh season 4-7, understandable since they just found out that they would be without their leading scorer for half the season after expecting him to play day one.

Since then though the Pacers have played 30-14, top teams in the NBA during that span are

SAS- 34-10
MIA- 32-12
OKC-32-12
LAC- 31-13
IND 30-14
DEN- 28-16
MEM- 27-17

Indiana has played like an elite team for about 3/4 of the season and still don't have their leading scorer (he's making his debut tonight).

Indiana's offense is coming around too, after being last in the league in almost every category for a while they are now 21st in TS% and 22nd in Offensive efficiency. Over the last 11 they have averaged well over 100 points while still maintaining the #1 defense in the NBA, and handily so at that.

There isn't a metric that suggests the Nets are as good as the Pacers, the Pacers stand up quite well to most every team in the NBA except for the elite 4 (SAS, OKC, LAC, MIA). Indiana is right there in the conversation for 5th best in the NBA along with Memphis, Denver, Healthy Chicago etc...

Regarding attendance, it's been on an uptick. We nearly sold out a game against the lowly pistons last night, and it's been steadily improving for a while. The brawl really, really turned the people of Central Indiana off of the NBA. These things take time, but it's getting back to where it was gradually. Another playoff run will do wonders.

Billups > Hill
Rip = Granger
Prince < PG
Sheed = West
Ben = Hibbert

I'd say

Billups>Hill
Rip<Granger
Prince<George
Sheed=West
Ben>Hibbert

is more accurate. Pistons were better at 1 and 5, Indiana has better swings. Both teams played elite defense relative to their peers at the time.

[cgg]

There isn't a metric that suggests the Nets are as good as the Pacers, the Pacers stand up quite well to most every team in the NBA except for the elite 4 (SAS, OKC, LAC, MIA). Indiana is right there in the conversation for 5th best in the NBA along with Memphis, Denver, Healthy Chicago etc...

Nets are rated much higher than the Pacers in eye pokes per game.

[Jake0890]

the Pacers stand up quite well to most every team in the NBA except for the elite 4 (SAS, OKC, LAC, MIA).

Not sure about many teams that stand up to Miami better than the Pacers. They're big and physical, and they knock Miami around every time they meet.

As for San Antonio, we're picked apart by them every time.

[daschysta]

the Pacers stand up quite well to most every team in the NBA except for the elite 4 (SAS, OKC, LAC, MIA).

Not sure about many teams that stand up to Miami better than the Pacers. They're big and physical, and they knock Miami around every time they meet.

As for San Antonio, we're picked apart by them every time.

I was more just referring to general caliber of team rather than matchups.

[DLaren]

People keep saying you need a superstar to win a championship. Who the heck did the Pistons have?

Billups
Rip
Prince
Sheed
Ben

So which one of those would you consider a superstar? You could argue the Pacers are an identical but better version of them. If I had to compare the players, I'll even do worst case scenario of comparing them.

Billups > Hill
Rip = Granger
Prince < PG
Sheed = West
Ben = Hibbert

I like the Pacers, and I've decided they're the team I'm going to choose to represent the East this season, BUT...


That 2004 Pistons team was a statistical anomaly that you had to reach back almost a decade to site as an example of winning without a Superstar. Plus, they compensated for lack of Superstardom by having 4 all-stars in their starting line-up; and they still only won because the Lakers were dysfunctional, not because the Pistons were the better team.

I think the Pacers are gritty enough to get out of the East, but not talented enough to take down whoever represents the West.

[daschysta]

People keep saying you need a superstar to win a championship. Who the heck did the Pistons have?

Billups
Rip
Prince
Sheed
Ben

So which one of those would you consider a superstar? You could argue the Pacers are an identical but better version of them. If I had to compare the players, I'll even do worst case scenario of comparing them.

Billups > Hill
Rip = Granger
Prince < PG
Sheed = West
Ben = Hibbert

I like the Pacers, and I've decided they're the team I'm going to choose to represent the East this season, BUT...


That 2004 Pistons team was a statistical anomaly that you had to reach back almost a decade to site as an example of winning without a Superstar. Plus, they compensated for lack of Superstardom by having 4 all-stars in their starting line-up; and they still only won because the Lakers were dysfunctional, not because the Pistons were the better team.

I think the Pacers are gritty enough to get out of the East, but not talented enough to take down whoever represents the West.

Indiana also starts 4 guys who have been all-stars since 2008, and none of them are past their prime yet. Additionally Paul George has a higher ceiling than anyone on that Pistons team and has a chance to grow into an elite player (he's already a star at 22 years old). Granger has been a better player than than Hamilton on his career, scoring more points on better efficiency than Hamilton generally did (largely because he's a very good 3 point shooter and Hamilton didn't shoot them as a general rule). West and Sheed are comparable. Basically the Pacers have better swingman, and the Pistons had an advantage at the point guard and center slots. If Paul George becomes what he has the potential to become the Pacers pretty clearly win the unscientific position by position comparison. It's hard to compare their defense, especially since the rules aren't even the same any more, but Indiana is the best defensive team in their NBA by a significant margin, and the Pistons were elite on that end in their NBA too.

I wouldn't write of Detroits championship by blaming the Laker's chemistry, they got to the finals another time too, and they pretty much matched the Spurs punch for punch in an incredibly close series that could have gone either way.

[cgg]

People keep saying you need a superstar to win a championship. Who the heck did the Pistons have?

Billups
Rip
Prince
Sheed
Ben

So which one of those would you consider a superstar? You could argue the Pacers are an identical but better version of them. If I had to compare the players, I'll even do worst case scenario of comparing them.

Billups > Hill
Rip = Granger
Prince < PG
Sheed = West
Ben = Hibbert

I like the Pacers, and I've decided they're the team I'm going to choose to represent the East this season, BUT...


That 2004 Pistons team was a statistical anomaly that you had to reach back almost a decade to site as an example of winning without a Superstar. Plus, they compensated for lack of Superstardom by having 4 all-stars in their starting line-up; and they still only won because the Lakers were dysfunctional, not because the Pistons were the better team.

I think the Pacers are gritty enough to get out of the East, but not talented enough to take down whoever represents the West.

Pacers have 4 all stars in their starting line up last time I checked.

[NickLidstrom]

The Pistons didn't just win a championship, but took an excellent Spurs team to a hard fought game seven. Then you have all the ECF appearances. The Pacers have done what, exactly? Had a good series against the Heat that they lost? You can try to claim that the individual Pacer players are better than the Pistons' (though Hibbert = Wallace is insane), but those Pistons' teamplay and coaching were on a whole different level.

[Pacerlive]

I could care less how the Pacers build because no one is guaranteed a superstar player and even if you draft one its not like they will stay forever. You build chemistry and good things will happen and that's always been how the Pacers build a good team. The spurs are more of a model on how to build than the Pacers but thats in large part of due to their scouting department being one of the best.

[Blame Rasho]

I don't think they are anything special but if their fans are happy and they are winning... good for them. I mean, there are so many other teams that have for whatever reasons can not put a good product on the floor after so many years.

[Shv3d]

I could care less how the Pacers build because no one is guaranteed a superstar player and even if you draft one its not like they will stay forever. You build chemistry and good things will happen and that's always been how the Pacers build a good team. The spurs are more of a model on how to build than the Pacers but thats in large part of due to their scouting department being one of the best.

It doesn't matter how great the Spurs scouts are, they wouldn't have won any championships without lucking into Tim Duncan.

[Indy07]

The lack of respect that is being given to the Pacers in this thread is hilarious...but completely understandable. Small market team, minimal national coverage, and no marquee name for casual fans to recognize. As a Pacer fan, i know the Heat are better and I try to be objective when looking at things, but I honestly think they have a shot at the Eastern Conference title..and yes, that does make them a Contender.

Comparing last season's series with the Heat is pointless for both sides. Bosh was hurt and Paul George was no where near where he is at now, which is the biggest difference . I personally believe that in a couple of years, Paul George will be the 5th or 6th best player in the NBA. He's not there yet, but he is a 6'10 swingman with unlimited range, borderline elite athleticism and is already a lock down man defender. He's about as close as you can get to a LeBron-stopping prototype (or at least slowing down since no one is stopping LeBron)

As of right now, PG has shown he can effectively guard LeBron and that he is up to the task, which definitely wasn't the case last year. He's #1 in Defensive Win Shares and has the support of the one of the best defensive, if not the best, PF/C combo with David West and Hibbert - They are also in the top 5 of Defensive Win Shares (George Hill rounds out the top 20). With Hibbert at 7'2, David West at 6'9 and Paul George at 6'10, the Pacers have a huge advantage against Miami's small lineups.

All that being said, I don't think this is the year the Pacers get past Miami. I believe that Paul George needs to elevate his game even more for the Pacers to win, something i'm not sure he can do this year. But he's going to continue to get better, as will Stephenson, Hibbert, and Hill. And I believe next year is when they get past the Heat.

[ComboGuardCity]

Ok...that 2004 Pistons comparison is way off.

Billups >>>>>> Hill
Rip > Granger....why? He's playing out of position at the 2 and Rip had the role of shooting off screens. Granger and George play the same way
Prince < George. But Prince was the glue guy. The pacers don't really have that. ANd no, its not George Hill
Sheed >>>> West. Sheed was a better defender and scored anytime he wanted.
Ben >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hibbert. This one was the worst. Ben is a Top 5 defensive player of all time.

In todays game, the Pacers are good enough to win it IMO. BUt they are not the 04 Pistons....not even close.

[Indy07]

I'm not a big fan of the '04 Pistons comparison either. These Hibbert - Ben Wallace comparisons are pretty far off. Ben Wallace was a work horse. Ben Wallace was a much better rebounder, he was actually able to play more than 30 mins a game, and never got into foul trouble. I will say that they do have one thing in common..both suck on offense. The entire Pistons team was veteran heavy and they could win with balance. The Pacers are still young and a lot of the players are still finding their niches in the NBA

[Pacerlive]

I could care less how the Pacers build because no one is guaranteed a superstar player and even if you draft one its not like they will stay forever. You build chemistry and good things will happen and that's always been how the Pacers build a good team. The spurs are more of a model on how to build than the Pacers but thats in large part of due to their scouting department being one of the best.

It doesn't matter how great the Spurs scouts are, they wouldn't have won any championships without lucking into Tim Duncan.

Not sure if I would agree with that. They could have won one IMO but certainly they wouldn't have been as impressive as a team.

[Nuntius]

pacers offense is absolutely pathetic... you couldnt outscore us starting tyshon taylor and reggie evans. our defense is pathetic and we held you to what, 75 points in 4 quarters and overtime?

complete frauds. i hope we drop to the 6 or 7 seed so we can play you and actually get out of the first round

Do you plan to scratch David West's eye in the playoffs again?

Besides, it was the 5th game in 7 nights. We were considerably tired after our b2b2b.