RealGM

Makes more sense than some like to think and shouldn't be completely off the table.

Not against all teams, but looking at the 2 most recent losses, it could have made a difference.

With Thad Young playing hurt, Monta Ellis might be a better starter against some teams.

Teague, Ellis, Miles, PG, Turner

Even when the opponent should decide to put the smaller, better defender on PG, in this case Chandler and Crowder. It gives the Pacers an opportunity to play faster than their opponent (which was the whole intention at the beginning of the season) and it would leave the taller players, Gallinari and Amir Johnson in this case, having to chase CJ Miles around screens. Which seems a bit more difficult to me than PG having to defend a player like Amir Johnson, who has the bigger body, but not that much bigger.

One could argue that our rebounding might become even worse when going smaller, but I don't buy any of that until a small lineup with Paul at the 4 has actually happened for more than just a couple of games. There are multiple other ways to get the rebound besides size advantage, like being quicker and/or smarter.

If only it wasn't completely off the table.

I agree with you in certain match ups. I wouldn't want PG banging with some of the bigger 4s, but teams like Denver I think it makes a lot more sense.

Pacers_Freak wrote:I agree with you in certain match ups. I wouldn't want PG banging with some of the bigger 4s, but teams like Denver I think it makes a lot more sense.

For every bang PG has to take, that bigger 4 might have to take 10 more steps to chase our small forward, unless they want to guard PG on the perimeter themselves.

I agree some 4s are off limits to match up against PG, but we can not know the advantages of such a move until PG is willing to try it for more than a couple of games. As you said yesterday, this is a league with grown ass men. You have to be willing to take some bangs from bigger(not much bigger) dudes if you want to contend.

This isn't to say it's a terrible idea, but...

In practice, it never really worked out the way we hoped it would. If you have CJ Miles at the 3 and Paul George at the 4, the better perimeter defender is gonna guard Paul George the majority of the time. If they gotta deal with the mismatch of a true 4 guarding CJ Miles, they'll live with that all day long compared to the alternative. Against some teams, like maybe Denver, that's still probably a good option. But the idea that we can weaponize Paul George on offense by getting a power forward to guard him . . . which sounds like a great idea in theory . . . it's just that most teams aren't gonna be dull enough to fall for the trick.

boomershadow wrote:This isn't to say it's a terrible idea, but...

In practice, it never really worked out the way we hoped it would. If you have CJ Miles at the 3 and Paul George at the 4, the better perimeter defender is gonna guard Paul George the majority of the time. If they gotta deal with the mismatch of a true 4 guarding CJ Miles, they'll live with that all day long compared to the alternative. Against some teams, like maybe Denver, that's still probably a good option. But the idea that we can weaponize Paul George on offense by getting a power forward to guard him . . . which sounds like a great idea in theory . . . it's just that most teams aren't gonna be dull enough to fall for the trick.

No, but they were dull enough to let the Pacers start 12-5 W-L last season when CJ Miles volunteered to guard power forwards and be guarded by power forwards.
Which IMHO was the last time the Pacers showed some greatness in their basketball for more than just a couple of games in a row.
Very logically, because the Pacers have a roster to be playing fast and small.

Either way, as long as it is off the table, we can speculate as much as we want. And I can bash Paul George all I want because

Paul George admits that the Pacers are in a slump and the All-Star is willing to do whatever it takes to get the team back on track, Montieth adds in the same piece. “At this point it’s win,” George said after a recent loss to the Nuggets. “Whatever I’ve got to do to win. If I have to put up 30 shots to win, I’ll put up 30 shots to win.”

simply isn't completely true.

Should also play Turner at four against some teams. PG taking more shots is not the answer. The problem is defense.

Sent from my 831C using RealGM mobile app

Wizop wrote:Should also play Turner at four against some teams. PG taking more shots is not the answer. The problem is defense.

Sent from my 831C using RealGM mobile app

Not a fan of that idea. You want Turner guarding Wilson Chandler or tonight guarding Saric? To me that makes our defense way worse. Doesn't help it.

Then play zone.

Sent from my 831C using RealGM mobile app

I was a fan of the Mahinmi/Turner lineup. I'm repeating myself but... It has always made sense to me to think of Turner as a combo 4/5 in the same vein as the player he's always compared to in LMA. At the 4 he could be a really neat weak side shot blocker and shooting threat like Ibaka, and at the 5 still the burgeoning rim protector that he is now. I always thought it was a mistake to think of Turner as a pure 5 for a number of reasons including his age and size, but when we tried him at the 4 last year we hadn't really adequately prepared him for it.

However, I don't think a Jefferson/Turner lineup accomplishes the same thing. It's beating a long dead horse, but the Jefferson signing was just never the right move for us, imo. A 3 big rotation of Mahinmi/Turner/Young would have been solid as **** no matter what combo you put out there. Now we either deal with Jefferson's extra crappy defense or try to fill the gap with super "meh" NBA players like Seraphin, Christmas, and this year's version of Allen. I'm not super thrilled with either of those options but those are the only realistic ones we have at this point.

Using CJ Miles to guard power forwards is going to beat the **** out of him again and we don't have enough shooters on this team to go into the playoffs again with him all beat up. His proper place is at the 2 and that's always been super obvious.

boomershadow wrote:Using CJ Miles to guard power forwards is going to beat the **** out of him again and we don't have enough shooters on this team to go into the playoffs again with him all beat up. His proper place is at the 2 and that's always been super obvious.

So obvious that you had to invent a person saying that CJ Miles should be guarding 4's again?

Pacersike wrote:

boomershadow wrote:Using CJ Miles to guard power forwards is going to beat the **** out of him again and we don't have enough shooters on this team to go into the playoffs again with him all beat up. His proper place is at the 2 and that's always been super obvious.

So obvious that you had to invent a person saying that CJ Miles should be guarding 4's again?

Hm?

boomershadow wrote:

Pacersike wrote:

boomershadow wrote:Using CJ Miles to guard power forwards is going to beat the **** out of him again and we don't have enough shooters on this team to go into the playoffs again with him all beat up. His proper place is at the 2 and that's always been super obvious.

So obvious that you had to invent a person saying that CJ Miles should be guarding 4's again?

Hm?

A. Who is saying here or on the Pacers that CJ should be defending power forwards again?

B. If nobody is saying that, why did you bring it up and why are you implementing it in our future?

Unless you are talking to yourself, it is not really obvious to me who you are talking to exactly or who doesn't see the super obvious as well as you can.

Pacersike wrote:A. Who is saying here or on the Pacers that CJ should be defending power forwards again?

B. If nobody is saying that, why did you bring it up and why are you implementing it in our future?

Unless you are talking to yourself, it is not really obvious to me who you are talking to exactly or who doesn't see the super obvious as well as you can.

The reasons the team went with the strategy of CJ Miles guarding power forwards, during the whole Paul George at the 4 experiment from the beginning of last season, haven't gone away any. One, that George is by far the best wing defender on the team and there is nobody else on the team that can replace what he does on that end of the floor if he's moved to a different position. Second, that George has never really demonstrated any ability to guard power forwards, and he's made it quite clear he doesn't have any desire to. None of that has really changed since last year.

So...if the suggestion is that we try to play small ball again, CJ Miles guarding power forwards again is the probable result. If you are suggesting we actually play PG as a real, legit 4 who actually guards other team's power forwards, could that work? We really don't have any clue. Zero idea what that kind of defense looks like, but if we were going to try it, it's success would hinge upon having answers to both those points.

boomershadow wrote:The reasons the team went with the strategy of CJ Miles guarding power forwards, during the whole Paul George at the 4 experiment from the beginning of last season, haven't gone away any. One, that George is by far the best wing defender on the team and there is nobody else on the team that can replace what he does on that end of the floor if he's moved to a different position. Second, that George has never really demonstrated any ability to guard power forwards, and he's made it quite clear he doesn't have any desire to. None of that has really changed since last year.

So...if the suggestion is that we try to play small ball again, CJ Miles guarding power forwards again is the probable result. If you are suggesting we actually play PG as a real, legit 4 who actually guards other team's power forwards, could that work? We really don't have any clue. Zero idea what that kind of defense looks like, but if we were going to try it, it's success would hinge upon having answers to both those points.

But there is no such thing as PG playing the 4 when he isn't guarding any power forwards.
CJ Miles would be defending small forwards and even if it might seem a very hard thing to do against some small forwards, there is always an advantage about it. What is harder to do? CJ Miles and PG defending players who are a bit bigger than them or the opponent power forward having to defend a much smaller and quicker CJ Miles?

Last seasons beginning until CJ Miles got hurt, had the Pacers always 4-6 games above .500.
The only reasons the experiment ended was because CJ Miles got hurt and Vogel prefers to play big, not because they lost too many games. With PG being the taller guy, there is not much reason to believe it work less well than last year.

PG as a 3 or a 4, the Pacers need another defensive wing. I think you are giving PG too much credit for how good his defense has been this season. His defense has taken a serious hit since he is trying to be a good leader.

Paul George is the one who needs to change his attitude. I mean, even as a small forward he rarely dares to get physical and post up his man. He whines about getting no calls, but he seems to shy away from physicality. If you don't want to try to defend 4s for more than just 1 game, you are not willing to do whatever it takes to get wins.
I find it equally important as getting a bench upgrade.

Asking your best/franchise player to play up a position is a bad idea. Long term banging against bigger guys is hard the body and you don't want to do that to your best player. You don't see LeBron James or Kwai Leonard doing it. Why do you think Tim Duncan spent so much time (until the playoffs) at the 4 rather than the 5? It is clearly the perception of the player that playing up a position is bad for their career and smart franchises get it.

I would add that that the same logic applies to Myles Turner. Small ball with your two best players going against bigger guys is a poor long term strategy.