Pacers Finalizing $90M Extension For Paul George

[dice]

How come no one bats an eyelid when guys who are elite offensive players but mediocre defensive players get maxed out then? Seeing as it's more difficult to find elite defenders than scorers you'd think this should be more highly regarded in terms of monetary compensation.

The long answer is defense isn't quite as valuable as offense. It's not a 50-50 split. If you pay 20 million a year to Thabo Sefolosha, you will lose ball games. Everyone in the NBA is a great athlete. Almost all of them can play at least passable defense if they take it seriously and try. The other team will score, and if you don't have enough guys on the floor who can score too, you will lose.

yes, defensive play is more dependent on effort, but there's also simply less variation in defensive ability league-wide

[SF_Warriors]

Anyone that thinks george should make basically as much as lebron and durant has got to be kiddjng themselves . His defense is slightly better, but his offensive ability doesnt even compare
And dont give me the he csn develop into a star offensive player spiel

[Tave]

Well I think it's obvious that he can, the question is will he.


He's a 6'10" athletic freak with a money-sweet jumper. He's got holes, but he made significant progress every season.


It wouldn't be the strangest thing if he petered out, but right now he's one of the more obvious young candidates for perennial all-star.

[Nuntius]

How come no one bats an eyelid when guys who are elite offensive players but mediocre defensive players get maxed out then? Seeing as it's more difficult to find elite defenders than scorers you'd think this should be more highly regarded in terms of monetary compensation.

Because most people just follow the box scores and adhere to the ESPN concept of "more PPG equals better player".

partly that, and partly because good offense beats good defense

It has never been proven that good offense beats good defense, actually. That's just a cliché.

[dice]

It has never been proven that good offense beats good defense, actually. That's just a cliché.

first of all, it can't be a cliche if it's not common statement, which that isn't. secondly, i'm referring to individual offense/defense rather than teams. the best defender in league history won't be turning michael jordan into an average offensive player. why? because good offense beats good defense. that doesn't need to be proven. it's common knowledge for anyone who follows the sport

[Nuntius]

first of all, it can't be a cliche if it's not common statement, which that isn't.

It actually is an extremely common statement in basketball circles. Commentators use it a lot (especially when someone makes a tough shot) and this phrase is also used a lot in this site when trying to make a point (just like you did). So, it definitely is a cliché around these parts.

secondly, i'm referring to individual offense/defense rather than teams. the best defender in league history won't be turning michael jordan into an average offensive player. why? because good offense beats good defense. that doesn't need to be proven. it's common knowledge for anyone who follows the sport

1) Nothing and no one can turn Michael Jordan into an average offensive player. There is a reason why he is the GOAT. He is Jordan after all. Is there a new Jordan in our era? No, there isn't.

2) Basketball is a team game, my friend. How do you create a good defensive team? By having great individual defenders and building a good defensive system. Both offense and defense are applied in a team concept. Good defensive teams tend to beat good offensive teams in the playoffs. Do you want an example?

Just look at the Chicago - Brooklyn and Indiana - New York series in last year's playoffs. The better defensive teams advanced in both cases.

[dice]

first of all, it can't be a cliche if it's not common statement, which that isn't.

It actually is an extremely common statement in basketball circles. Commentators use it a lot (especially when someone makes a tough shot) and this phrase is also used a lot in this site when trying to make a point (just like you did). So, it definitely is a cliché around these parts.

i rarely hear it. "defense wins championships", on the other hand...

secondly, i'm referring to individual offense/defense rather than teams. the best defender in league history won't be turning michael jordan into an average offensive player. why? because good offense beats good defense. that doesn't need to be proven. it's common knowledge for anyone who follows the sport

1) Nothing and no one can turn Michael Jordan into an average offensive player. There is a reason why he is the GOAT. He is Jordan after all. Is there a new Jordan in our era? No, there isn't.

lebron james, magic johnson, the list goes on. you're not neutralizing those guys no matter who you throw at them. and these are guys that entire defensive game plans are geared toward slowing down. why? you guessed it. because good offense beats good defense

2) Basketball is a team game, my friend. How do you create a good defensive team? By having great individual defenders and building a good defensive system. Both offense and defense are applied in a team concept. Good defensive teams tend to beat good offensive teams in the playoffs. Do you want an example

i just got finished stating that i was talking about individual offense/defense. we're comparing the relative monetary value of a defensive stud like paul george's and that of an offensive wizard like kevin durant. we're not comparing the pacers and thunder. and i'll pay more for durant's offense than george's defense any day of the week

[Mourning_Would]

All I'm saying is Paul George is a glorified Andre Iguodala with worse playmaking and possibly better 3-point shooting. He also shoots 42%, which is below average for any player, let alone one that is about to recieve a max contract . No way does that deserve 18 million a year is all I'm saying.

[LeonSmith]

18 mil for mediocre offense and elite perimeter defense. A bit much, no?

How come no one bats an eyelid when guys who are elite offensive players but mediocre defensive players get maxed out then? Seeing as it's more difficult to find elite defenders than scorers you'd think this should be more highly regarded in terms of monetary compensation.

Because perimeter defense isn't as valuable as elite, efficient scoring. PG isn't a go-to scorer or play maker and shoots 42% FG. Him making 18 million is a bit much. I'd say 13-14 million would be more reasonable


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I hope you're not saying that Paul George has finished improving as a player.

BTW I'm not saying he's going to develop into Scottie Pippen and sure he MIGHT be at his peak (very unlikely) or regress (even more unlikely). But to say "he does this right now and deserves this much money" is crazy. Young guys are always paid on potential and PG is one of the least riskiest guys to max out in terms of potential improvement + current skill level.

[StocktonShorts]

Just getting to this thread now, and too lazy to read the whole thing, so excuse me if these points have already been made:

1) You can't compare this deal to those of LeBron and other elite players. Some guys deserve WAY more than the what the CBA allows them to make. It's not wrong to say George is worth $18M/year and also that he's not worth as much as LeBron. In the current CBA, LeBron is criminally underpaid.

2) Having said that, has a team ever been successful with two defense-oriented max (or near-max) players? The Pacers have $35M/year committed to Hibbert and George in 2014-15 and 2015-2016.

[Woodsanity]

Rondo's rating is way too high.
Jennings rating is also way too high but chuckers are always overrated by nba2k

[dice]

has a team ever been successful with two defense-oriented max (or near-max) players? The Pacers have $35M/year committed to Hibbert and George in 2014-15 and 2015-2016.

if by successful you mean winning a championship, then probably not. and the pacers are unlikely to be the exception

[dice]

Rondo's rating is way too high.
Jennings rating is also way too high but chuckers are always overrated by nba2k

what, do they use PER?

[Rerisen]

If the Pacers are as good as many are predicting then I don't see the big deal with the contract. Indy then is simply securing a perennial and serious title contender into the future.

If however they look a lot like last year, winning right around 50 games, give or take a couple, and their playoffs vs Miami ends up as something of a perfect storm due to matchups in hindsight, then they are going to have a good chance of being stuck in place with George and Hibbert eating so much of the salary pie.

[Mourning_Would]

How come no one bats an eyelid when guys who are elite offensive players but mediocre defensive players get maxed out then? Seeing as it's more difficult to find elite defenders than scorers you'd think this should be more highly regarded in terms of monetary compensation.

Because perimeter defense isn't as valuable as elite, efficient scoring. PG isn't a go-to scorer or play maker and shoots 42% FG. Him making 18 million is a bit much. I'd say 13-14 million would be more reasonable


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I hope you're not saying that Paul George has finished improving as a player.

BTW I'm not saying he's going to develop into Scottie Pippen and sure he MIGHT be at his peak (very unlikely) or regress (even more unlikely). But to say "he does this right now and deserves this much money" is crazy. Young guys are always paid on potential and PG is one of the least riskiest guys to max out in terms of potential improvement + current skill level.

I just dont see 18 million a year potential. Most players have their breakout year statistically in the 3rd year. At best I see an 18/7/4 player on about 45-46 FG%, and great perimeter D. Good, but I'm looking for someone who can consistently create efficient offense throughout big games for the max. 17/7/4 in his 3rd year doesn't scream max contract.

EDIT: And I understand he can work on some things, I just don't see him being THAT much better

[Nuntius]

first of all, it can't be a cliche if it's not common statement, which that isn't.

It actually is an extremely common statement in basketball circles. Commentators use it a lot (especially when someone makes a tough shot) and this phrase is also used a lot in this site when trying to make a point (just like you did). So, it definitely is a cliché around these parts.

i rarely hear it. "defense wins championships", on the other hand...

If you rarely hear it then I doubt that you watch a lot of NBA games or read this forum outside of your team's board

Defense wins championships is used a lot as well but it's used because this is actually true. If you just look at the defensive efficiency of some past champions you will easily see the immediate correlation between the two.

i just got finished stating that i was talking about individual offense/defense. we're comparing the relative monetary value of a defensive stud like paul george's and that of an offensive wizard like kevin durant. we're not comparing the pacers and thunder. and i'll pay more for durant's offense than george's defense any day of the week

Durant is probably the best scorer in the league and he is far from a defensive sieve as well so I'd pay more for Durant as well.

We're not comparing George with Durant, though. We will have to compare them if George meets the Derrick Rose criteria and actully makes similar money to him. And if he meets that criteria then it'd mean that he has improved enough in order to be put in that proverbial ballpark.

[Nuntius]

lebron james, magic johnson, the list goes on. you're not neutralizing those guys no matter who you throw at them. and these are guys that entire defensive game plans are geared toward slowing down. why? you guessed it. because good offense beats good defense

LeBron is amazing but he's not Jordan. He almost got stopped by Boris Diaw last year and he would have lost if the Spurs were able to grab that last defensive foul or just foul.

You cannot win in the playoffs if you are not a good defensive team. That's a fact.

[Nuntius]

All I'm saying is Paul George is a glorified Andre Iguodala with worse playmaking and possibly better 3-point shooting. He also shoots 42%, which is below average for any player, let alone one that is about to recieve a max contract . No way does that deserve 18 million a year is all I'm saying.

All you're saying is that Paul George is a glorified AI in your opinion. That doesn't make it true.

[Mourning_Would]

All I'm saying is Paul George is a glorified Andre Iguodala with worse playmaking and possibly better 3-point shooting. He also shoots 42%, which is below average for any player, let alone one that is about to recieve a max contract . No way does that deserve 18 million a year is all I'm saying.

All you're saying is that Paul George is a glorified AI in your opinion. That doesn't make it true.

So you believe 17/7/4 on 42%FG is worth 18 million a year for 5 years?

[Nuntius]

All I'm saying is Paul George is a glorified Andre Iguodala with worse playmaking and possibly better 3-point shooting. He also shoots 42%, which is below average for any player, let alone one that is about to recieve a max contract . No way does that deserve 18 million a year is all I'm saying.

All you're saying is that Paul George is a glorified AI in your opinion. That doesn't make it true.

So you believe 17/7/4 on 42%FG is worth 18 million a year for 5 years?

I just don't believe that PG has peaked yet. 17/7/4 on 42% FG is just the start. It isn't the end of his career. He just turned 23.

Also, it is not guaranteed that he'll make 18 million a year for 5 years. He will have to earn them first. He will have to continue being a top 5 forward and top 15 player in the league.