RealGM

Sometimes you just need to look at things glass half full rather then glass being half empty. The show must go on. And with Granger out for the next 3 months, it is truly a reality check time for the Paul George. This is his first time in his young career that he can be "the man". There will be an adjustment period for him, as their is with every player who is about to take on that role, but that will be his role with this team.

The Pacers will live and die with George this season. Can he carry the team? Can he be "the guy"? We will learn much more about George in the next three months then anyone ever thought we would in the next year.

SI.com on if George can be the guy for the Pacers- http://nba.si.com/2012/11/07/paul-georg ... na-pacers/

It's startling how dependent this team is on George and Hibbert right now. According to NBA.com/Stats, the Pacers are giving up 15.8 more points per 100 possessions when George is on the bench, and an incomprehensible 28.6 points per 100 possessions with Hibbert sitting.

These numbers are probably going down, but for now, yikes.

I don't think he's the guy we've all wanted him to turn out to be. He's just not. He makes bonehead plays late in games occasionally, and that's a big problem. Granger had a level head in clutch situations, and George just doesn't seem to have that.

We've all been preaching "potential, potential, potential" since he came into the league, but at some point that potential just has to turn into on the court performance. Now don't get me wrong, he's a solid player, but I don't think he's THAT guy for our team. He's a good 2nd or 3rd option, but he won't be Granger's replacement.

He's got 3 months to prove me wrong, and I really hope he does, but I doubt it. I just don't see the all-star caliber player in him.

Paul George doesn't look ready to be a number one scoring option. I don't see him ever being a guy who takes people off the dribble. Getting it done that way now is that much more difficult when he's dealing with the other team's best wing defender. He's clearly struggling to figure how he best helps the team. He's a smart and coachable guy so he will get there.

I don't see anything magical about everything coming together for him this year. He'll grow some in Granger's absence but, for now David West is our go to guy and George Hill might be the second best scoring option.

I've been saying it for a while...Paul George will not be the man.

He's too timid. He has no drive to dominate. It's clear by the blank look on his face when the game is on the line. Instead we have George Hill and West who are the only players with enough balls to step up. Unfortunately, they aren't star caliber players.

Jake0890 wrote:I don't think he's the guy we've all wanted him to turn out to be..

Considering where he was drafted I would say he is pretty close to a best case scenario at this point in his career. He has also shown great improvement from year to year so I would %100 disagree with that statement.

tocooks wrote:

Jake0890 wrote:I don't think he's the guy we've all wanted him to turn out to be..

Considering where he was drafted I would say he is pretty close to a best case scenario at this point in his career. He has also shown great improvement from year to year so I would %100 disagree with that statement.

You're right, he's great for where he was picked. But what I meant was he wasn't going to be the star player that we were all hoping that he would turn into and be he allstar on our team.

I get what you are saying, but I don't agree with your point about him not being able to obtain allstar level status.

He has gone from 7.8 ppg to 12.1 ppg to now 14.3 ppg and he is miles ahead of Danny Granger at this point in his career, on both sides of the ball. I think if you look at the big picture he is on track with these hefty expectations the entire NBA has set for him.

I know its a slow process but if you look at film of him from two years ago to today it is like night and day.

As a fan base we've talked up the idea of building a team around five or more good but not great players. Given that we never completely blew it up and as a result never had the chance to draft a great player, we were stuck with the best case scenario of building a Detroit Pistons of the early and mid 2000's type team. Paul George fits that prototype just fine. I still see him with the best upside of anyone on the team. I'll be surprised if he is ever a great scorer but he could be a remarkable two way player.

I agree that if you look at him a couple of years ago and now you see a remarkably improveed player. Maybe not based on his scoring average but his overall competency as an offensive player has shown nice development. And' that's what fits the current Pacer team.

Paul really needs to work on getting to the FT line. With his athleticism he should be there shooting at least 4 FTs per game.

He struggles with creating his own shot and realistically that's what will hold him back from that next level. His stroke seems fine and it looks as though his handles have improved so far this season, but there's still the question of whether or not he can make plays happen on his own.

Stephenson will become a leader before George does.

It's looking more and more like he simply doesn't have the game to be the main guy. Lots of promising things written about him this summer that he apparently read and believed. Not all that unusual or surprising. Interesting to see how he deals with everything. In the meantime his game is just plain ugly, too many turnovers and bad shots. His defense isn't even consistently good. If Granger were around he could have continued to focus on defense. That might have been better for everyone.

8305 wrote:It's looking more and more like he simply doesn't have the game to be the main guy. Lots of promising things written about him this summer that he apparently read and believed. Not all that unusual or surprising. Interesting to see how he deals with everything. In the meantime his game is just plain ugly, too many turnovers and bad shots. His defense isn't even consistently good. If Granger were around he could have continued to focus on defense. That might have been better for everyone.

I am not sure about this. In most sports (not usually basketball because it's a young man sport) they always tell you not to rush your youth. George, because he went to a low key college, didn't get to play against high level competition on a weekly basis. I don't think anybody in our organization wanted to rush George this season, but had to because of the injuries to Hill and Granger.

He's still only 22 years old. And it took Tracy McGrady until his fourth season in the NBA to truly breakout. This is George's third season.

Grang33r wrote:

8305 wrote:It's looking more and more like he simply doesn't have the game to be the main guy. Lots of promising things written about him this summer that he apparently read and believed. Not all that unusual or surprising. Interesting to see how he deals with everything. In the meantime his game is just plain ugly, too many turnovers and bad shots. His defense isn't even consistently good. If Granger were around he could have continued to focus on defense. That might have been better for everyone.

I am not sure about this. In most sports (not usually basketball because it's a young man sport) they always tell you not to rush your youth. George, because he went to a low key college, didn't get to play against high level competition on a weekly basis. I don't think anybody in our organization wanted to rush George this season, but had to because of the injuries to Hill and Granger.

He's still only 22 years old. And it took Tracy McGrady until his fourth season in the NBA to truly breakout. This is George's third season.

I'm not saying he can't acquire the skills to be the go to guy. They just aren't there now. If he's going to be a main option though I don't think it will be a traditional iso guy. He lacks the quick first step and handle needed to create the seperation. It seems to me you could take the nice stroke, remarkable length and above average athleticism he has and within an offensive system create post ups and spot ups for him and he could be a 20 point a night guy. I'm thinking systems in which Rip Hamilton and Reggie Miller thrived. Not what we are doing right now but maybe someday?

Last night Paul George missed 12 shots and scored 12 points, against the Milwaukee Bucks. He registered 2 assists and 2 turnovers. I'm beginning to think George's ceiling might need to be lowered a little bit.

maljanNBAfan wrote:Last night Paul George missed 12 shots and scored 12 points, against the Milwaukee Bucks. He registered 2 assists and 2 turnovers. I'm beginning to think George's ceiling might need to be lowered a little bit.

It needs to be lowered a lot. it's a good thing that Granger got injured. Now you guys know who your players really are. George looks like a more athletic Luol Deng, which is pretty good...as a 4th option on offense.

If you compare his timeline to Danny Granger, who I prefer over Deng, then Paul is still well ahead of the curve.

Like Roy, PG needs to visit the wizard too.

Maybe Simon should hire a motivational coach/speaker/therapist.
Regardless, the skill is very much there, his cup runneth over.

In a way, the fact that he's having some troubles COULD be a blessing in disguise. Ideal scenario, he continues to improve (perhaps a tad slower than we originally thought) but when it comes to re-negotiate to re-sign him off his rookie deal, we get him cheaper than a max (which we would've had to shell out had he completely taken over.) We re-sign him for less than the max, and THEN he explodes and takes over.

If he takes over starting tomorrow, that's fine, but salary cap-wise, this could be a blessing in disguise,

chube wrote:In a way, the fact that he's having some troubles COULD be a blessing in disguise. Ideal scenario, he continues to improve (perhaps a tad slower than we originally thought) but when it comes to re-negotiate to re-sign him off his rookie deal, we get him cheaper than a max (which we would've had to shell out had he completely taken over.) We re-sign him for less than the max, and THEN he explodes and takes over.

If he takes over starting tomorrow, that's fine, but salary cap-wise, this could be a blessing in disguise,

Quite the optimist. If he's not playing his ass-off to get a large deal then he certainly won't do so afterward.