Chuck Texas & PMOTT3's Early Off-Season Review: Indiana Pacers

[Hawk Eye]

Chuck Texas Review

Losses:

David West
Roy Hibbert
Luis Scola
Chris Copeland
Damien Rudez
Donald Sloan
CJ Watson

Obviously the big losses here are in the frontcourt with long-time starters Hibbert and West gone and Scola as well.   So we should see a different Pacers team than we are used to.

Draft:

Miles Turner
Joseph Young

No problems here with picking Turner.  They seem to have keyed on him fairly early and they knew they were going to need bigs.   

Trades:

Hibbert to LA for TPE and 2nd
Rakeem Christmas for 2019 2nd
Rudez for Budinger

Moved Hibbert in a salary dump.  I was okay with this.  They wanted to go in a different direction and might could have gotten some kind of asset if they took back a contract, but they want to be competitive.   Taking a flier on Christmas is fine.    I didn't understand teh Bud deal.   I just don't think Bud is a very good player, he makes a lot more $$ and if by some miracle he pans out, they don't have control over him like they did Rudez.   

Free Agency:

Stuckey got paid
Monta Ellis
Lavoy Allen
Jordan Hill
Glenn Robinson III

Monta doesn't really fit the Pacers we grew used to, but he will help this team create offense and he plays really hard.   Stuckey got rewarded after giving them a good year on a min deal last year.   I'm a little confused with both Monta and Stuckey getting such big deals.   Allen and Hill are decent veteran bigs to hold down the fort.

Depth Chart(guessing esp on PG):

Mahinmi/Hill/Turner
George/Allen/Whittington/Christmas
Solo Hill/Budinger/Robinson
Monta/Miles/
George Hill/Stuckey/Young

^Above may be totally wrong so Pacers fans don't kill me.

Needs:

A starting PF so George can play SF.   A true backup PG.   Stuckey and Monta are fine as long as Hill is there to play 32-34 mpg but if he gets hurt its pretty rough.  More overall talent.  Assuming no lingering effects George is a star, Monta and George Hill are good solid starters and then its just good solid role players.

Additional Thoughts:

I'm interested to see how different they look this year.  They should play faster and will be more athletic than we are used to.   Can someone unexpected step up and have a big year for them.

Win-loss Prediction:  44-38

Really hard to pin down this team.   I could see them winning 50 games in the East if things go well since their lack of dominant bigs is less of a factor in that conference.   I could also see them finishing below .500 if George isn't 100% and some of these major changes don't work.

Off-Season Grade:  C

I'm okay with moving on from West/Hibbert but it hurts to lose your 2 best bigs and they replaced them with just a collection of guys.  They got great value on the Monta deal, but combined with the Stuckey deal it just leaves me confused.   They brought in some interesting youth which I liked, but additions of Jordan Hill and Chase Budinger don't do much for me.    Overall I just kinda feel like OK.

PMOTT3 Review

Losses:

David West
Roy Hibbert
Luis Scola
Chris Copeland
Damien Rudez
Donald Sloan
CJ Watson

West and Hibbert are the main losses. Scola should hurt some too but the rest of the losses should be somewhat tolerable.

Draft:

Myles Turner
Joseph Young

I loved their draft. I thought Turner had the highest ceiling of the players that were left available at #11. Young was a nice get and has looked pretty good in SL as well.

Trades:

Hibbert to LA for TPE and 2nd
Rakeem Christmas for 2019 2nd
Rudez for Budinger

I feel like they sold low on Hibbert and could have gotten more. But if the plan was to not take back any contracts then they did well creating a 15+ million TPE.

Christmas trade was fine. Nothing wrong with giving up a future 2nd to take a look at him.

I really didn't understand the Budinger/Rudez swap. I agree with CT for all the same reasons basically. Although both players aren't even meaningful enough for me to get worked up over it honestly.

Free Agency:

Rodney Stuckey
Monta Ellis
Lavoy Allen
Jordan Hill
Glenn Robinson III

Having both Stuckey and Ellis on the roster seems a little redundant to me. I also think both are slight overpays but nothing extreme. But Ellis should take the load off of George Hill from doing the shot creating.

Allen and Hill were nice complimentary bigs to add to the rotation. They wont make up for the loss of West/Hibbert but they should still help.

Robinson III had some good moments in SL for the hawks so I'm glad he's getting his shot.

Current Depth Chart (really rough):

PG: G. Hill/Young
SG: Ellis/Stuckey
SF: Miles/S. Hill/Budinger/Robinson III
PF: George/Allen/Whittington/Christmas
C: J. Hill/Mahinmi/Turner

*Basically taking a shot in the dark here; depth chart could be way off

Needs:

I would be shopping the market for a 2nd banana, co-star, to pair with George. The team doesn't feel like it has enough top-end talent at the moment. Adding a vet PG would make a lot of sense as well. If the plan is to transition Paul George into the full time PF then they need a SF.

Additional Thoughts:

I'm also excited to see this new look Pacer squad. Im expecting a big year/return from PG-13 as long as he is able to stay healthy. Will be interesting to see how he plays at the PF position Bird wants him at as well.

Win/Loss Prediction: 42-40

I'm expecting this season to be a long adjustment period. New look, more up-tempo, i think it takes time for George to adjust playing PF and guarding them on the other end. I dont see enough talent on the roster to get a high playoff seed but i think they will be in the mix for a 6,7,8 seed.

Off-Season Grade: B-

Had a great draft, Ellis was a good get (Stuckey seems unnecessary now though), Didn't understand the Budinger deal, felt like they sold a tad low on Hibbert. If they had a grade between a C+ and B- i would choose that but since they don't I'm going with the latter.

[bondom34]

I think a B- seems about right. Turner looks like a solid pick, Ellis was a good signing. They get knocked for the Bud for Rudez deal and I just think Hibbert's value was that low. Expect a lower seed in the playoffs, people are writing them off but I'd imagine 6-8 is reasonable.

[pacers33granger]

Nice write up and hard to disagree with really anything either of you said.

I loved almost everything Bird did this offseason (except the Bud deal), but there were no real homeruns outside of Turner possibly being better than where he was picked. The most impressive part of the offseason is that Bird completely changed the team and gave us a lot of long term flexibility. Only JHill, Mahinmi, and Bud expire and everyone is on a movable deal. So we could be going into next offseason with max space with a roster of:

GHill/Young
Ellis/Stuckey
Miles/SHill/GRIII
PG13/Allen/Christmas
Turner/Whittington

Plus it's exciting that we had only SHill last season as a guy on a rookie deal and now we've added Turner, Young, GRIII, and Christmas on long deals. I'm hoping Bird makes a hard run at Horford next offseason, though I doubt he leaves Atlanta.

[Wizop]

everyone is guessing on the rotation but most of us think the backcourt rotation will be as PMOTT3 has it and not as Chuck does. Stuckey proved to be an excellent second unit weapon last year and signing Monta didn't change that need. he's also enough of a point guard to pair with Young or to be part of a three guard rotation with Monta and GHill should Young not prove ready. I have to think they see it that way too as otherwise they would have signed a veteran backup point guard instead of GRIII.

The Bud deal isn't that hard to understand. Damo proved to be just a spot up shooter and was going to have real trouble getting on the court with PG13 taking 36 minutes of the 3/4 rotation. Bud has a shot to share the 3 minutes with Miles when PG is at the 4 if he can defend as well as Solo while providing more offense. he might not prove worthy but the risk is low as he doesn't have a long term contract and he didn't push us into the luxury tax.

The big question is whether PG will be primarily a 4 or will just play there when we match down. I expect him to play enough 4 so that everyone is 100% comfortable with him there when he has to be there to defend LeBron, Draymond, and the like. but I can only see us winning 50 games if our bigs play well enough to force PG back to the 3. that'll happen if some combination of Turner, JHill, Mahinmi, and Allen rises to the top of the rotation.

[Texas Chuck]

everyone is guessing on the rotation but most of us think the backcourt rotation will be as PMOTT3 has it and not as Chuck does. Stuckey proved to be an excellent second unit weapon last year and signing Monta didn't change that need. he's also enough of a point guard to pair with Young or to be part of a three guard rotation with Monta and GHill should Young not prove ready. I have to think they see it that way too as otherwise they would have signed a veteran backup point guard instead of GRIII.

.

Definitely appreciate the input on that.

My thinking was simply that Monta and Stuckey combined deserve more than 48 minutes and unless the plan is to play 3 small guards one of them has to play some PG. Monta figures to be the starting 2 so I put Stuckey at backup PG, but really I don't know that position really matters with that trio in the backcourt. All of them will spend time on-ball.

[winter_mute_13]

Thanks for the review Chuck and PMOTT. Nothing much to disagree with, as the others have said.

I'll just offer up my thoughts on the Bud/Damo trade and the Ellis/Stuckey redundancy.

Regarding Budinger, it seems clear that the Pacers want to play a style that features 2 SFs instead of having a traditional PF. The Pacers really have only 2 guys who could play this style, i.e. Paul George and Solo Hill, and maybe CJ Miles in a pinch. So the Pacers could really use another big SF like that, and they apparently decided to gamble on Budinger's health. One might argue that Damo could have been used in the same way, but frankly despite being taller he really has no sort of inside game. He is a shooting specialist only, and I won't be surprised if the Wolves eventually cut him. So basically we took on Bud's contract in exchange for cap space, which to me seems not very different from say, signing Jordan Hill to a 1-year deal.

Regarding Stuckey, I believe the Pacers originally intended to let him walk after securing Ellis (according to Stuckey's agent, the Pacers didn't even contact him at the start of FA). But after the Hibbert trade, the Pacers suddenly had a lot of cap space and not many worthy targets to use it on. Stuckey was probably "best of the rest" at that point, and we signed him to a very tradable contract. So I suspect we'll dangle him as trade bait as soon as we could.

[Laimbeer]

C feels right. Nothing awful and nothing great. The rebuild has finally begun.

[8305]

I enjoyed the read, always interesting to see what someone outside the Pacer tent thinks.

My best guess says the Pacers win 50 if the trio of George Hill, Monta Ellis and Paul George mesh effectively by the end of 2015. If we can look something like the Phoenix Suns sans 2013-2014 with the additional fuel of big time talent (a rejuvenated Paul George) this could be a good team. If this bombs I could see going after an Al Horford type power forward in the summer of 2016 but if they see promise with this style I see them looking for another long athletic wing guy if they chase big money free agents at all.

[8305]

C feels right. Nothing awful and nothing great. The rebuild has finally begun.

I think its been 30 years since the Pacers did a true rebuild. They've moved out of "all in" chase of a championship mode seen in the Spring of 2014 and they've brought in some young guys they thought might be undervalued. But, I feel pretty certain the objective is making the Playoffs and being competitive once there.

[winter_mute_13]

C feels right. Nothing awful and nothing great. The rebuild has finally begun.

I think its been 30 years since the Pacers did a true rebuild. They've moved out of "all in" chase of a championship mode seen in the Spring of 2014 and they've brought in some young guys they thought might be undervalued. But, I feel pretty certain the objective is making the Playoffs and being competitive once there.

That's still a rebuild though, in my book. And FWIW, I think a rebuild was inevitable once West leaves. West deciding to opt out a year early just accelerated the process.

I don't know whether the Pacers will be better or not from these changes, but one thing for sure is that the Pacers will be different. That's sort of an accomplishment in itself (how often do GM's manage to completely make over their teams?) but obviously we can't say yet whether it will yield positive results.

[CBA]

Probably a D. I like the Turner pick, but if you're not going to traditionally rebuild then losing Hibbert for nothing makes very little sense. I can't really count Paul George as a move done this offseason and besides him it looks like they took a step back - but not big enough of a step back to make it worthwhile - while adding long contracts.

I enjoyed the read, always interesting to see what someone outside the Pacer tent thinks.

My best guess says the Pacers win 50 if the trio of George Hill, Monta Ellis and Paul George mesh effectively by the end of 2015. If we can look something like the Phoenix Suns sans 2013-2014 with the additional fuel of big time talent (a rejuvenated Paul George) this could be a good team. If this bombs I could see going after an Al Horford type power forward in the summer of 2016 but if they see promise with this style I see them looking for another long athletic wing guy if they chase big money free agents at all.

Why would a star free agent leave a winning team for a team that has "bombed"?

[pacers33granger]

Probably a D. I like the Turner pick, but if you're not going to traditionally rebuild then losing Hibbert for nothing makes very little sense.

Hibbert was horrible for us last year, clearly didn't want to be here, and was a negative overall. He still defended the rim alright, but Mahinmi did about as good a job as he did and wasn't a cancer elsewhere. He needed to go and no one was willing to pay anything more than cap space. There was no way he'd resign so we had to just cut our losses.

You can say we should have traded him last year, but I'm not sure the offers would have been much better and the thought was that he would rebound after Lance leaving. Instead he dogged it all year If we were going the tank to rebuild route, it would probably make more sense to keep Hibbert honestly.

[8305]

C feels right. Nothing awful and nothing great. The rebuild has finally begun.

I think its been 30 years since the Pacers did a true rebuild. They've moved out of "all in" chase of a championship mode seen in the Spring of 2014 and they've brought in some young guys they thought might be undervalued. But, I feel pretty certain the objective is making the Playoffs and being competitive once there.

That's still a rebuild though, in my book. And FWIW, I think a rebuild was inevitable once West leaves. West deciding to opt out a year early just accelerated the process.

I don't know whether the Pacers will be better or not from these changes, but one thing for sure is that the Pacers will be different. That's sort of an accomplishment in itself (how often do GM's manage to completely make over their teams?) but obviously we can't say yet whether it will yield positive results.

Agree, its a rebuild as the Pacers do them. The Robinson and Christmas acquisitions whether they bear any fruit or not is a move in the right direction. I'm hoping the purchase of the Mad Ants allows the Pacers to be more comfortable with young guys getting minutes in NBDL. Its gotta be better for them than getting minimal run with the big team.

[basketballwacko2]

Why would a star free agent leave a winning team for a team that has "bombed"?

Well I disagree that the Pacers have "bombed." And when said "Star's" team belly flops again in the playoffs he might be looking for a team that has a better future.

[basketballwacko2]

Probably a D. I like the Turner pick, but if you're not going to traditionally rebuild then losing Hibbert for nothing makes very little sense.

Hibbert was horrible for us last year, clearly didn't want to be here, and was a negative overall. He still defended the rim alright, but Mahinmi did about as good a job as he did and wasn't a cancer elsewhere. He needed to go and no one was willing to pay anything more than cap space. There was no way he'd resign so we had to just cut our losses.

You can say we should have traded him last year, but I'm not sure the offers would have been much better and the thought was that he would rebound after Lance leaving. Instead he dogged it all year If we were going the tank to rebuild route, it would probably make more sense to keep Hibbert honestly.

Pacers probably should have moved Roy at the Allstar break, we might have gotten a little more out of him. By time Bird made the statement about playing faster every team in the league knew we wanted him gone.

[loserX]

Roy had to go, and sounds like there's not much they could have done to keep West around (although I will say, as much as I love Larry Bird, I didn't particularly like the way he handled the Roy situation this summer, and it sounds like Roy and West didn't either).

I've always thought Ellis would be a good fit between George Hill and Paul George, so I like the signing. And if it's part of their new vision, so much the better. I agree with PMOTT and Chuck that following that up with a fairly hefty deal for Stuckey makes less sense. They started going cheap and young in the frontcourt, so why give the money to Stuckey?

I'm not convinced that making Paul George a full-time PF is a great idea, and it sounds like he agrees with me. But there aren't a lot of options behind him.

I guess I would have preferred them to spend some of that Stuckey money on a PF (though they did get Rakeem Christmas for practically nothing). So a bit of a mixed bag of an offseason, to me.

[pacers33granger]

Roy had to go, and sounds like there's not much they could have done to keep West around (although I will say, as much as I love Larry Bird, I didn't particularly like the way he handled the Roy situation this summer, and it sounds like Roy and West didn't either).

Yeah he could have handled it a bit differently, but I think Bird was just fed up with Hibbert. The team did a ton for him and I'm sure Bird was pretty pissed about how Hibbert handled last season. They developed him (remember how bad he was as a rookie; part of it was him of course, but the team put in a ton of work with him), stood behind him/defended him, and Vogel was constantly lobbying for the whole verticality thing.

It seems Roy took all the outside criticism and just shut down. The team always had his back, but he gave up on it and his teammates. I took Bird's comments as mainly "we know you don't want to be here, but you're going to take your money, so there's not going to be much of a spot left for you."

With West, I still love him, but I think he was looking for an excuse to get out. I just refuse to believe that he would really essentially back Hibbert's attitude from the past year, though he looked like he may have given up last year too.

[Scoot McGroot]

Probably a D. I like the Turner pick, but if you're not going to traditionally rebuild then losing Hibbert for nothing makes very little sense. I can't really count Paul George as a move done this offseason and besides him it looks like they took a step back - but not big enough of a step back to make it worthwhile - while adding long contracts.

I enjoyed the read, always interesting to see what someone outside the Pacer tent thinks.

My best guess says the Pacers win 50 if the trio of George Hill, Monta Ellis and Paul George mesh effectively by the end of 2015. If we can look something like the Phoenix Suns sans 2013-2014 with the additional fuel of big time talent (a rejuvenated Paul George) this could be a good team. If this bombs I could see going after an Al Horford type power forward in the summer of 2016 but if they see promise with this style I see them looking for another long athletic wing guy if they chase big money free agents at all.

Why would a star free agent leave a winning team for a team that has "bombed"?

Hibbert was leaving for nothing after the year anyway, and clearly, his value wasn't high. So, we got a 2nd now (which turned into Christmas), got to resign Stuckey (whole we couldn't have resigned otherwise since we didn't have bird rights), and swapped Rudez for a better all around player in Budinger. It's not sexy, but it's pretty good value.


Losing West hurt tremendously, but there's not really a thing we could have done to keep him. Otherwise, I think the best we could've possibly done as a small market team like is could've done.

[winter_mute_13]

Roy had to go, and sounds like there's not much they could have done to keep West around (although I will say, as much as I love Larry Bird, I didn't particularly like the way he handled the Roy situation this summer, and it sounds like Roy and West didn't either).

Fair enough, a lot of Pacer fans (including me) didn't like it either. But if it's a cynical attempt to free up money for FA, it kinda worked didn't it? West got upset and opted out (not the sole reason, but still) and we got Monta from the freed up money.

Neither West nor Hibbert were going to be around the year after anyway.

I guess I would have preferred them to spend some of that Stuckey money on a PF (though they did get Rakeem Christmas for practically nothing). So a bit of a mixed bag of an offseason, to me.

The timing was tough. A Hibbert trade was feasible only once major FA big men were off the board. This made sense because Roy was apparently the fallback plan for a number of teams (Dallas, LA) in FA. But it also meant that pickings were slim by the time we went shopping with the Hibbert money. Who was the best PF left on the board at the time? Derrick Williams? So as I've mentioned, I think Stuckey is signed more as a trade asset than as a long term piece.

[Wizop]

Golden State's win has everyone playing follow the leader. the PF position is being redefined. whether we need to shop for one who plays on the block is an open question for me. I'm not convinced PG should get big minutes there but we'll see.

here's a crazy thought. Bird has talked about moving to PF himself late in his career and enjoying it. that was when he had back troubles. if Paul is a half step slower than before the leg break even if that condition is temporary, might playing the 4 help cover up any lingering effects of the injury?