Pacers/Mavs

[wemby]

I like Lively more than most, but yeah, this seems unbalanced in the Mavs favor and I don't see the Pacers moving Nembhard either, so...

[Scoot McGroot]

I am confident they would rather keep money for a center than sign 3 PGs, the fact they didn't tells me they don't view him as one.

Teams keep players and move money later all the time. And they play all 3 as PG. I think you’re overthinking the whole “extending McConnell” thing. It doesn’t have to be a statement on the rest of the roster as much as “he’s a good player that is a great vet and we’d like to keep him”.

Extending McConnell could have meant they don’t think Nembhard is a PG, even though they play Nembhard as the PG a ton before and after extending McConnell. Extending McConnell could have meant they didn’t see themselves as needing to save money for Myles, and he’s walking. Or just that they’ll move other money if they have to later. Or extending McConnell could have meant they like to keep good players, so they did. And they’ll continually assess the roster and make appropriate moves as they need.

But Nembhard plays a ton of PG for Indy. He often plays as lead ball handler even when sharing the court with Haliburton. Carlisle often plays 2 PG’s together, as he liked to in Dallas, so having 3 PG’s is pretty necessary, especially when your star Pg in Haliburton has a history of back spasms sidelining him for weeks?

Totally disagree here, Indiana is a very cost comsious franchise, the logic of paying to keep good players 3 at same position is something I just don't buy.

Cost conscious, sure, but a team that has ALWAYS been willing to pay to keep their own developed guys (TJ and Andrew both count here). And again, 3 PG’s that all play big minutes and all handle the ball is something that has always been important to Carlisle. I really don’t see why it’s difficult to reconcile that?

[wuote]
The whole premise of this trade is to get cost controled center, if cost control wasn't a need, the trade would be pointless.[/quote]

Sure. But again, Indy now has McConnell and Nembhard on market level contracts. And they both play. And Nembhard is key to unlocking Haliburton. I don’t see why Indy would deal maybe their 2nd most important player, and let Turner walk, to utilize a swap for Lively? To me, it makes more sense for Indy to try and keep Turner and keep Nembhard and figure out the rest later, like maybe moving Obi or Nesmith or TJ or…

Like I said, I just desagree on both accounts
I don't see Nembhard as a good enough to be starting PG, but off ball guard.

Sure. I’m just saying that we’ve SEEN Nemby be a successful starting PG when Haliburton has missed time. If Indy didn’t have a top PG in Tyrese, Nemby would be the guy at the 1. Luckily, they fit together really well, too.

I don't think Indy sees him as a PG, but you knkw your team better than me.

Fair. And yeah, they see him as both a PG AND a guy that can pair on court with Haliburton. Hes not a SG when he’s on the court in that he’s not spotting up off ball or running off screens to pop jump shots. He’s a PG in all the sets, as is Haliburton. He dribbles and gets to his spots for almost all his buckets. It’s a 2 PG system because Haliburton and Nembhard are both PG’s in their play.


I did totally get why it’s hard to see that though. Most teams still play a more rigid classic lineup system of only one PG, only one SG, etc, so it’s easy to look at Indy and say “Nembhard has to be a SG if he’s starting and they have Haliburton. And he must not be a PG because they kept McConnell”. But they play a 2 and sometimes 3 PG lineup. Carlisle loves having multiple ball handlers in the lineup together. If Haliburton isn’t there, Nembhard is the guy at the 1. It’s a little different in playing 2 PG’s, but Nembhards defensive prowess with Haliburton’s size and shooting prowess make it nearly perfect.

[Wizop]

Pacers started winning when Nembhard returned from an injury. He's a key to our success. If you want Nembhard because you view him as a wing, consider our real wings - Nesmith or Mathurin. Lively would play behind Turner in Indy. You might also consider Obi if AD is your 5. And if your aim is really the 25 first, pacers need a 26 first more.

[GatherStepGuru]

I don’t see the Mavs giving up that much for Nembhard when they already have Max Christie. I think they’d be better served trying to go after a Monk or another scoring combo guard to hold it down until Kyrie is ready.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I think Lively is a much more valuable if healthy, but I understand if someone wants to value less because of injuries, OTOH, Nembhard does nothing for Dallas, he's not a primary on ball guard, which Dallas really need with Kyrie down.

Nembhard has proven so many times what he’s capable of doing as a lead guard. He’s just having to play out of position.

I said this off-season that his manager is awful because I was convinced hed go get a huge raise and be given the keys to a new teams offense(as far as starting PG.)

[Mavrelous]

I think Lively is a much more valuable if healthy, but I understand if someone wants to value less because of injuries, OTOH, Nembhard does nothing for Dallas, he's not a primary on ball guard, which Dallas really need with Kyrie down.

Nembhard has proven so many times what he’s capable of doing as a lead guard. He’s just having to play out of position.

I said this off-season that his manager is awful because I was convinced hed go get a huge raise and be given the keys to a new teams offense(as far as starting PG.)

Last 2 years Nembhard has logged healthy 800 minutes as the only PG on the team, he yielded average 114 ORTG ( Pacers are good offfensive team) and -4.5 net rating.
Evidence doesn't suggest he's a good PG, eye test for the few games I watched also doesn't.
I trust Pacers fans believing he can be, but if Dallas is goving up major builing piece they will be looking for something more certain.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I think Lively is a much more valuable if healthy, but I understand if someone wants to value less because of injuries, OTOH, Nembhard does nothing for Dallas, he's not a primary on ball guard, which Dallas really need with Kyrie down.

Nembhard has proven so many times what he’s capable of doing as a lead guard. He’s just having to play out of position.

I said this off-season that his manager is awful because I was convinced hed go get a huge raise and be given the keys to a new teams offense(as far as starting PG.)

Last 2 years Nembhard has logged healthy 800 minutes as the only PG on the team, he yielded average 114 ORTG ( Pacers are good offfensive team) and -4.5 net rating.
Evidence doesn't suggest he's a good PG, eye test for the few games I watched also doesn't.
I trust Pacers fans believing he can be, but if Dallas is goving up major builing piece they will be looking for something more certain.

Inconsistency in playing time at PG is a factor to a degree I’d say.

Watch on YouTube

;pp=ygUUTmVtYmhhcmQgdnMgd2FycmlvcnPSBwkJhAkBhyohjO8%3D

Now, not showing that video as proof as one game doesn’t prove anything. I’m showing it because Pacers fans see all that from him on a frequent basis - including in big playoff games last year when Haliburton got hurt.

I think he’d have a Brunson-esque like story had he gone to another team and took over PG duties.

[Texas Chuck]

I think he's good. I think trying to sell everyone he's Brunson if only given his own team is maybe damning your own guy with expectations. Brunson had shown signs of being a lead guard going all the way back to his Nova days. Not sure Nembhard has his offensive upside.

Would still love him in Dallas where he walks in the door playing starter's minutes from day 1. But I wouldn't have the expectations he's a Kyrie replacement. I think Dallas would still be in desperate need of an offensive creator to tide them over to a Kyrie return(assuming he is still on the team).

[Wizop]

Brunson had shown signs of being a lead guard going all the way back to his Nova days. Not sure Nembhard has his offensive upside.

I wouldn't argue that. Brunson is more of an offensive threat. But Nembhard plays much better defense than Brunson. I think most Pacer fans would say that Nembhard's defense is a big part of our team's success. We were not nearly as successful when he was out with an injury. Now it's likely that the Pacers will make a summer trade of a player we do not want to lose in order to resign Turner and stay below the tax, but I doubt it will be Nembhard.

[Scoot McGroot]

I think he's good. I think trying to sell everyone he's Brunson if only given his own team is maybe damning your own guy with expectations. Brunson had shown signs of being a lead guard going all the way back to his Nova days. Not sure Nembhard has his offensive upside.

Would still love him in Dallas where he walks in the door playing starter's minutes from day 1. But I wouldn't have the expectations he's a Kyrie replacement. I think Dallas would still be in desperate need of an offensive creator to tide them over to a Kyrie return(assuming he is still on the team).

Oh, he’s absolutely not the offensive scorer Brunson is, and never will be. He’s a guy that can just run a system, and will get a tough bucket when you absolutely need it, as well as the easy buckets. He’s not going to be a guy to just go out and get 8 free throw attempts every night or out up 20. And he’ll put guys in positions to get easy buckets with his probing dribble and his passing and vision.

But his defense! He’ll make all defense in his career for sure. Zach Lowe proffered he would’ve this year if he qualified on games played.

To me, the Brunson comparison is simply “2nd round PG possibly overlooked a bit by playing with a bigger star PG, and absolutely blossoming when he’s finally given his own team to run”. But it definitely won’t be an offensive comparison.

I keep calling Andrew a Derrick McKey for this generation. His stats may never jump out at you, but he’s just constantly doing things to help your team win.

[jbk1234]

I dislike the idea for both teams. The Pacers are suspect defensively with Nembhard, and they'd be far worse on the perimeter and POA without him.

From the Mavs POV, AD could not have been more clear that he doesn't want to play center. If a Lively trade is followed by an AD trade request or injury, then what? Their front office sees AD and Lively as an elite defensive frontcourt. I'm not sure they're wrong.

[Wizop]

I keep calling Andrew a Derrick McKey for this generation. His stats may never jump out at you, but he’s just constantly doing things to help your team win.

It's impossible to overstate how much Donnie Walsh liked McKey.

[Wizop]

The Pacers are suspect defensively with Nembhard

did you mean to write that? I think we're suspect defensively WITHOUT Nembhard.

[jbk1234]

The Pacers are suspect defensively with Nembhard

did you mean to write that? I think we're suspect defensively WITHOUT Nembhard.

The Pacers had the 17th ranked defense with Nembhard.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I think he's good. I think trying to sell everyone he's Brunson if only given his own team is maybe damning your own guy with expectations. Brunson had shown signs of being a lead guard going all the way back to his Nova days. Not sure Nembhard has his offensive upside.

Would still love him in Dallas where he walks in the door playing starter's minutes from day 1. But I wouldn't have the expectations he's a Kyrie replacement. I think Dallas would still be in desperate need of an offensive creator to tide them over to a Kyrie return(assuming he is still on the team).

Well, I said Brunson-esque intentionally.

Not Brunson, just a guy who I believe would flourish as a full time PG.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I think he's good. I think trying to sell everyone he's Brunson if only given his own team is maybe damning your own guy with expectations. Brunson had shown signs of being a lead guard going all the way back to his Nova days. Not sure Nembhard has his offensive upside.

Would still love him in Dallas where he walks in the door playing starter's minutes from day 1. But I wouldn't have the expectations he's a Kyrie replacement. I think Dallas would still be in desperate need of an offensive creator to tide them over to a Kyrie return(assuming he is still on the team).

Oh, he’s absolutely not the offensive scorer Brunson is, and never will be. He’s a guy that can just run a system, and will get a tough bucket when you absolutely need it, as well as the easy buckets. He’s not going to be a guy to just go out and get 8 free throw attempts every night or out up 20. And he’ll put guys in positions to get easy buckets with his probing dribble and his passing and vision.

But his defense! He’ll make all defense in his career for sure. Zach Lowe proffered he would’ve this year if he qualified on games played.

To me, the Brunson comparison is simply “2nd round PG possibly overlooked a bit by playing with a bigger star PG, and absolutely blossoming when he’s finally given his own team to run”. But it definitely won’t be an offensive comparison.

I keep calling Andrew a Derrick McKey for this generation. His stats may never jump out at you, but he’s just constantly doing things to help your team win.

Yes, thank you, that was more or less what I was trying to say with my Brunson-esque comment,

[Helsbyte]

I am confident they would rather keep money for a center than sign 3 PGs, the fact they didn't tells me they don't view him as one.

Teams keep players and move money later all the time. And they play all 3 as PG. I think you’re overthinking the whole “extending McConnell” thing. It doesn’t have to be a statement on the rest of the roster as much as “he’s a good player that is a great vet and we’d like to keep him”.

Extending McConnell could have meant they don’t think Nembhard is a PG, even though they play Nembhard as the PG a ton before and after extending McConnell. Extending McConnell could have meant they didn’t see themselves as needing to save money for Myles, and he’s walking. Or just that they’ll move other money if they have to later. Or extending McConnell could have meant they like to keep good players, so they did. And they’ll continually assess the roster and make appropriate moves as they need.

But Nembhard plays a ton of PG for Indy. He often plays as lead ball handler even when sharing the court with Haliburton. Carlisle often plays 2 PG’s together, as he liked to in Dallas, so having 3 PG’s is pretty necessary, especially when your star Pg in Haliburton has a history of back spasms sidelining him for weeks?

Totally disagree here, Indiana is a very cost comsious franchise, the logic of paying to keep good players 3 at same position is something I just don't buy.
The whole premise of this trade is to get cost controled center, if cost control wasn't a need, the trade would be pointless.
Like I said, I just desagree on both accounts
I don't see Nembhard as a good enough to be starting PG, but off ball guard.
I don't think Indy sees him as a PG, but you knkw your team better than me.

Your last sentence is all that needs to be said. You obviously don't watch Indiana and therefore don't know the rotations or what we do.

[Scoot McGroot]

The Pacers are suspect defensively with Nembhard

did you mean to write that? I think we're suspect defensively WITHOUT Nembhard.

The Pacers had the 17th ranked defense with Nembhard.

Sure. But the Pacers are actually really good defensively with Nembhard on the court. Nearly elite. They're VERY VERY BAD with him off the court.

Read on Twitter

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw