RealGM

I really think GRIII could thrive in the starting lineup when PG returns. His perimeter defense and energy could bode well for the starting unit. I know injuries have left us shorthanded but Im not a big fan of Monta continuing to start when the team is at full strength. I think he would be awesome off the bench. Thoughts??

pacerfan1984 wrote:I really think GRIII could thrive in the starting lineup when PG returns. His perimeter defense and energy could bode well for the starting unit. I know injuries have left us shorthanded but Im not a big fan of Monta continuing to start when the team is at full strength. I think he would be awesome off the bench. Thoughts??

Don't hate it. I think the main question is when everyone is fully healthy who is the odd man out. GR3, Monta, CJ, Stuckey, or Brooks? One of them will be out of the rotation.

For me, it would be Brooks sitting. I'm all for GRob playing with Teague and Monta playing with Stuckey.

Wizop wrote:For me, it would be Brooks sitting. I'm all for GRob playing with Teague and Monta playing with Stuckey.

I agree. Plus theres no guarantee CJ or Stuck can stay healthy so Brooks could be back in the rotation sooner than later

Im hoping he stays in the starting five as well. The whole team can potentially improve with this one move. Ellis goes to the bench as the primary ball handler with the green light to be aggressive next to Stuckey. That could be a tough back court for any teams second unit to match up with; not to mention CJ Miles benefitting from Ellis and Stuckey attacking and additionally life gets easier for Jefferson with all that talent around him. I personally think Lavoy and especially Seraphin (out of shape) should keep the bench warm maybe they can help with the gatorade. McMillan should play nine. If I coached this team I would put Niang out there too to see what he can do while PG and CJ are out. 10 - 15 mins to gauge if he's ready.

Teague/Ellis
GRIII/Stuckey
George/GRIII/Miles
Young/Miles/Niang
Turner/Jefferson

SmashMouthRod wrote:Im hoping he stays in the starting five as well. The whole team can potentially improve with this one move. Ellis goes to the bench as the primary ball handler with the green light to be aggressive next to Stuckey. That could be a tough back court for any teams second unit to match up with; not to mention CJ Miles benefitting from Ellis and Stuckey attacking and additionally life gets easier for Jefferson with all that talent around him. I personally think Lavoy and especially Seraphin (out of shape) should keep the bench warm maybe they can help with the gatorade. McMillan should play nine. If I coached this team I would put Niang out there too to see what he can do while PG and CJ are out. 10 - 15 mins to gauge if he's ready.

Teague/Ellis
GRIII/Stuckey
George/GRIII/Miles
Young/Miles/Niang
Turner/Jefferson

I think we will see the rotation cut to 9 when/if we make the playoffs. That is not really feasible in 82 game grinder of a regular season. And trust me there is not a person around that is a bigger fan of keeping Lavoy on the bench than me.

I don't think he's ready to be honest.

3 times out of 5 games started he had the worst +/- by a decent margin.

OKC game: +8 other starters +16 +19 +19 +21
Nets game: +16 others starters +19 +21 +24 +25
last game: -23 other starters -14 -14 -13 -11

Warriors game he was among the rest of our starters, so the Clippers game was the only game that he truly had a positive impact, defending players like Mbah a Moute and Wesley Johnson. Not exactly great players.

I would have made Monta Ellis backup point guard from the beginning of the season and not signed Brooks, but right now, I think it's too early to start GR3, even though his skillset is exactly what we need besides PG and Teague. Monta his experience is more valuable to me though. Then again, if they keep faith in GR3 as a starter, he might be able to read the game a lot better when playoffs come.

I guess it depends on the bumps we have to face the rest of the regular, but right now I prefer Monta.

I like the idea. After all he projects to be the player everyone seems to agree we need. Turner and Young at the 4 and 5 makes us a bad rebounding team and this problem is made worse by the small back court (Teague/Ellis). Would Robinson make us any worse? Until it's proven that he does make us worse I say keep him with the starting group.

8305 wrote:I like the idea. After all he projects to be the player everyone seems to agree we need. Turner and Young at the 4 and 5 makes us a bad rebounding team and this problem is made worse by the small back court (Teague/Ellis). Would Robinson make us any worse? Until it's proven that he does make us worse I say keep him with the starting group.

It's not proven that starting me would make the Pacers worse. Start me! If you think it makes the team better start him. Otherwise start who Nate thinks gives us the best chance to win.

I think it happens all the time in the league when players are given an opportunity that lasts as long as they don't play themselves off the floor. This team isn't going to get much better as long as the Teague/Ellis backcourt continues. Robinson provides a glimmer of hope that things could improve. I think you need to put him out there, let him know he's going to be able to play through his mistakes and see where you are in a couple of months.

Pacersike wrote:I don't think he's ready to be honest.

3 times out of 5 games started he had the worst +/- by a decent margin.

OKC game: +8 other starters +16 +19 +19 +21
Nets game: +16 others starters +19 +21 +24 +25
last game: -23 other starters -14 -14 -13 -11

Those stats don't tell the whole story. He played the most minutes in all of those games which affected those numbers.

OKC: 3 minutes higher than anyone else and the bench all had very poor games by +/-
Nets:13 minutes higher, only starter to play over 30 minutes and he nearly played 40
Portland: only 1 minute more than Teague, but that whole game was terrible for everyone

That's also ignoring that he had the highest +/- in the Clippers game (+24, 10 higher than the next highest).

In the games he's started, albeit only 5, he's had 1 game where he shot badly (against GS) and is 5th overall for the team in TS% for the year. His TRB% is higher than any non-PG wing and he rarely turns the ball over. Also, while it's been higher since he's started, his USG is still the lowest on the team outside of Lavoy.

No all of his stats aren't great, but he's pretty much doing what Lance did for us that first year starting but with a much better shot instead of passing. This team could use his young energy in the SL.

The whole team is a work in progress and there will be many more growing pains to come, so why not let him get through his as well? It's not like he's displacing someone who should be starting.

To me Stuckey's the one that will be left out. Aaron Brooks has explosive shotmaking ability and three-point shooting, both of which have been a bright spot on a pretty dismal bench. CJ Miles has length, shooting, and good team defense instincts. Rodney is a capable penetrator, but when you have Ellis and Teague already, he becomes much more redundant.

I don't know if GRIII should start, but I think he should have Stuckey's minutes when CJ and Paul are back, which are around 20 mpg. I'm still a huge proponent of CJ Miles as a starter with the personnel we have.

Miller4ever wrote:To me Stuckey's the one that will be left out. Aaron Brooks has explosive shotmaking ability and three-point shooting, both of which have been a bright spot on a pretty dismal bench. CJ Miles has length, shooting, and good team defense instincts. Rodney is a capable penetrator, but when you have Ellis and Teague already, he becomes much more redundant.

I don't know if GRIII should start, but I think he should have Stuckey's minutes when CJ and Paul are back, which are around 20 mpg. I'm still a huge proponent of CJ Miles as a starter with the personnel we have.

I agree Stuckey's minutes should be cut. Which I hate saying, because I like him as a player and know he worked hard this past summer, but we just don't have a use for him and Brooks' game is kind of similar except he overdribbles and shoots threes instead of long twos. Also really really hard to rely on Stuckey playing and not getting injured.

I liked what happened to the rotation last night. Lavoy became the odd man out. Played small with the 2nd unit.

That was interesting. All year Lavoy hasn't been rebounding at a rate that a big should be rebounding at and GRIII is active enough to collect as many boards as he does while adding some speed and shooting.

In other news, Monta Ellis has a single digit PER, a negative VORP rating, and chucks his way to 31% from deep. I still believe CJ or GRIII should clearly be starting over him.

I wasn't sold on this idea at first, but now I am. Sign me up. Put him in.

Make Ellis the primary ball handler off the bench. Keep CJ's steaky shooting on the bench too.

They can try it, but I don't expect much of it.

I think we got bigger problems. Big men depth, rebounding, leadership, spacing, defense, off the ball movement.
Benching Monta Ellis isn't going to make Seraphin and Jefferson high energy players or Lavoy Allen a quality big.
Nor do we have a veteran wing besides PG who knows how to play defense without any youth errors.
Ellis and Jefferson are a defensive dream come true for the opponent and Ellis off the bench will hurt Brooks and Stuckey in stead of our starters.

It might cause that PG has to instruct his teammates more, which Ellis has been doing a lot, so I'm not against it if they try it.

But I would prefer to bench the guy that signed Al Jefferson because people had told him that Jefferson always gave them a hard time when trying to guard him. I want to bench the guy who has been throwing high usage players on a pile together, hoping they will turn themselves back into off the ball players, giving them so much money, they will do it because they really want to and not because they want more money

Larry Bird is a great basketball mind, but somebody needs to bench him and teach him that the game is developing and that you can't dismiss a good coach and then hire the first coach that walks into your office, because he makes a good impression.
Nor can you sign a talented player that has given much trouble to the opponent in the past, but is a terrible fit with your team.
Nor can he rely on players to change their game and do a lot of dirty work because they really want to.
Why on earth would Ellis be chasing Klay Thompson like a mad man when he is 31 years old and gets paid 11M a year?
Why on earth would Jefferson be diving after every rebound when he is 31 years old, fat and paid 10M a year?
This ain't 1985.

The Pacers need energy, rebounding, defense, but PG can't do it all. Brooks, Stuckey, Ellis, Jefferson are all past 30, Seraphin is out of shape and Young is paid second highest of the team, CJ Miles not good enough as defender or rebounder, and most of the other just don't have much talent: Lavoy, Niang, Young, Christmas. Teague is allright and Turner has talent, but the Pacers need 3 Robinson 3s to fulfill their potential to become relevant again.

Signing Ellis was a mistake, but understandable because West left and because of George Hill lack of playmaking skills.
But if you are not able to see his flaws and surround him with bad defenders and high usage players, that IMO is worse than signing him. Not to mention the quality of the players.

My apologies for going a bit off topic here and I would have made my own thread asking if Bird should consider returning into retirement, but I know that all of you agree with me and have no desire to dispute or confirm any of it, so why bother?
Kudos to you if you still reading this