Pacers acquire Jeff Teague as part of three team deal

[Nuntius]

Monta played off the ball in GS for some years. When Curry was drafted, he was far and away their best player (Ellis that is), so he did handle the ball more at that point. But he had some of his most efficient years as a slasher for GS. I'm confident he can do both (slash off the ball and handle the ball), which is why I'd prefer him to be our 6th man and backup ballhandler.

I don't believe that Monta is as athletic right now as he used to be when he was on GSW so he probably won't be as good as a slasher as he used to be.

That said, I'd have no issue with him being a 6th man and backup ball-handler. That's something I can get behind with. It's only as a starter that Monta causes fit issues.

And I fully believe that the system we have had the past few years has limited us on that side. We had good fitting pieces under Vogel and the offense was still terrible and didn't get it done when we needed it to. Too many times under Vogel we either got a bad shot or no shot in crunch time. The fit wasn't great last season, but, as I said, we haven't had a good offense under Vogel.

Actually, we did have a good offense under Vogel back in 11-12. We were #7 in Offensive Efficiency. It's true that our offense was poor during our ECF runs but it was pretty good before that.

Personally, I don't believe that our woes last year were coach-related. I believe that they were roster-related and personally I blame the roster construction. You have every right to disagree, though.

[Nuntius]

Its nowhere near a lateral move. Its a change in style of play. Bird wants uptempo and points. Hill albeit appreciated is not of the same caliber that Teague is when heallthy. If whats true that Teague played all last season with an injury then this trade is a significant upgrade.

So much ultimately will depend on the contract that Teague demands. If reasonable I believe Teague can become the point guard this team has needed for quite some time.

Pacers were a dominant team with Mark Jackson at point, and no one ever got him confused with Gary Payton. I appreciate Hill and all he brought to the table. But he is a passive player who at times dissappeared for several games at a time. then again, most players do.

the bottom line is George HIll is not a point guard and tbh im not real comfortable with Hill as the starting SG. Hill fit the ECF pacers teams as needed, but no longer is the team constructed as such.

Here's the thing. This move is an upgrade only if Monta is not the starting SG. If he is then he's going to dominate the ball and take touches away from Teague since Monta cannot play off the ball. Therefore, whether this move is an upgrade or not depends on what we do with Monta (and to a lesser extent Stuckey).

Yeah, I agree.

Looking at this from another angle. Ask yourself how usage will be allocated this year and its reasonable to expect that it will go #1 Paul George
#2 Jeff Teague
#3 Myles Turner

Can your #4 usage guy be an average at best defender and a poor 3 point shooter?

Exactly. I'm fine with Monta as a 6th man but our starting unit really needs a 3 & D guy at SG.

[PacersPride31]

Its kind of rediculous how obsessed some Pacers fans are with this move and the impact it has on Ellis. Ellis is still a very solid player. Teague can play off ball and has when ATL went with Schroder and Teague in the lineup. Teague's a versatile player and should be given the opportunity to adjust before labeling this deal a "lateral" move.

I agree that Teague can play off the ball but if we do then we're limiting him just like we did with GH. Teague is a better player than Monta and he is the one that should have the ball in his hands (along with PG). If we find a way to move Monta to the bench and sign a 3-point shooter to put at SG then the move has the potential to be very good.

Again, as much as I appreciate GHill the game has changed. Bird knows this and is moving accordingly in the right direction to compete. There are simply too many overwhelming point guards on the championship level teams that minimize GHills effectiveness.

I don't believe that Bird realizes that the game has changed. His insistence on signing ball-dominant players lately (Stuckey, Monta, Lawson) doesn't indicate that he understands exactly how the game has changed. Ball movement is where it's at right now.

Russell Westbrook, Curry, Irving, to name only a few. And the point gaurds on the teams that Pacers will likely be competing with in the Finals are overall terrible defenders. Matching up with a Westbrook or Curry in the Finals one has to ask what impact can GHill have.... without aggressively scoring points.

Competing in the Finals? We have to build a team good enough to advance through the Conference Finals before we get to speak about competing in the Finals.

With the Jazz its a perfect fit, because they have a true rim protecting specialist in Gobert. Favors is also a stalwart on defensive end. As a team the Jazz fit perfectly with Hills skillset.

Hill is a good fit in Utah, I agree.

Pacers no longer have the supporting cast to maximize Hills skillset in the uptempo NBA. What Teague provides is a point gaurd that can match the pace with the other Championship level teams. No one can stop Westbrook and a healthy Curry. But you can score points against them.

I don't know why the discussion is focusing in Hill. He's not the one who will make or break this trade. What we do with Monta is what will decide whether this trade is great or simply a lateral move.

Teague better suits the revolutionized style of the current NBA. This is no way a lateral move because it will significantly change the style in which the Pacers play. Whether it will be an upgrade or not has yet to be determined. But the offense is going to look significantly different than it has in previous seasons due to this trade.

And I'm telling you that the style we play won't change as long as Monta is still the starting SG. If he goes to the bench, then yes our style will change. But as long as Monta is a starter he will have the ball in his hands because if he doesn't then he cannot contribute.

Anymore teams are practically stacked with All-stars at every position that you must be able to score points. This move gives the Pacers more firepower in the backcourt. If GHills defense alone could stop a player like Westbrook then why make the deal, otherwise you better be able to score points against this type of players team.

It only gives us more firepower if Teague actually gets to handle the ball.

Teague has illustrated he has the offensive punch to carry a team. Look no further than the first round series with the Hawks few seasons back as spot on example of such dominance. Without DWest hitting a clutch shot(s) in game 6, Teagues dominance would have ousted the top seed Pacers.

I'm not arguing that Teague isn't a good offensive player. I'm arguing that he needs to have the ball in his hands if we want him to be as effective as he was in Atlanta.

What you dont see as normal as the big picture. Bird has a plan. Let him run it. I believe he has earned that much. Furthermore, we have had this same rodeo with Roy TRASHCAN Hibbert right??? you never relent even if alll supoort and eviddence clearly state such.

Were discussing Hill cause thats who Teague was dealt for. You state its "lateral" move i say False. How can it be??? are you telling me that were gonna put up exact same +/- defensively and offensively?? Thats nonsense. As eluded, its a trade to substantiate Birds vision to quicken pace. Bird is completely changing the way offense will flow and PG13 get his.

Are you seriously stating that Teague and GHill is lateral move in gettting PG13 the balll1?!?? thats laughable my friend. just baseless emotionally driven opinion. Listen, I truly appreciate GHILL but he aint the superstar. PG13 is.

Ask yourself... does this move help PG score the ball without burning energy out initiating offfense??? you should know the answer. Question - does this move make PG a better defender by not having to CARRRRRY the team offesnisvily???

Need I say more.



Regarding Ellis. re read my post. I cleearly stated in an ideal world we would just sign DeRozen or whatever other flavor of the Free Agent period we laudy daudy please. But that aint how it works. What im sayin is helluva lot worse options than Ellis.

yalll go about this like stats geeks. its basketball. best 5 on court win. give it a chance if thats what it be. Give Bird a chance to finalize roster.

Its July. Lets not micro analazye every little detail when we dont konw the fulll scope of what Bird has yet.



**** Regarding TRASHCAN. is he D Lg Bound yet???? he is gettttin damn close in what should be his prime ****

[Scoot McGroot]

What you dont see as normal as the big picture. Bird has a plan. Let him run it. I believe he has earned that much. Furthermore, we have had this same rodeo with Roy TRASHCAN Hibbert right??? you never relent even if alll supoort and eviddence clearly state such.

Were discussing Hill cause thats who Teague was dealt for. You state its "lateral" move i say False. How can it be??? are you telling me that were gonna put up exact same +/- defensively and offensively?? Thats nonsense. As eluded, its a trade to substantiate Birds vision to quicken pace. Bird is completely changing the way offense will flow and PG13 get his.

Well, I expect the team to put up a better ORtg. I expect us to put up a substantially worse DRtg. The question is whether we can outpace the drop off in defense with better offense, and I'm just not sure we can. I expect to lose quite a bit of that premium we used to run on (defense).

Are you seriously stating that Teague and GHill is lateral move in gettting PG13 the balll1?!?? thats laughable my friend. just baseless emotionally driven opinion. Listen, I truly appreciate GHILL but he aint the superstar. PG13 is.

Teague will help in ways, but he's still going to have to play a ton off ball, or else you're asking PG to turn into just an off the ball spot up shooter, and that's not happening.

Ask yourself... does this move help PG score the ball without burning energy out initiating offfense??? you should know the answer. Question - does this move make PG a better defender by not having to CARRRRRY the team offesnisvily???

It's asking Paul George to play a ton more defense and really be not only the best defender, but in many cases, the only defender. PG is going to expend a lot more energy defensively this season. We'll see if that focuses him more offensively, or if it tires him out and wears him out.

Need I say more.



Regarding Ellis. re read my post. I cleearly stated in an ideal world we would just sign DeRozen or whatever other flavor of the Free Agent period we laudy daudy please. But that aint how it works. What im sayin is helluva lot worse options than Ellis.

yalll go about this like stats geeks. its basketball. best 5 on court win. give it a chance if thats what it be. Give Bird a chance to finalize roster.

Its July. Lets not micro analazye every little detail when we dont konw the fulll scope of what Bird has yet.



**** Regarding TRASHCAN. is he D Lg Bound yet???? he is gettttin damn close in what should be his prime ****

Yup. Best 5 on court. Not the most talented 5, but the best 5, as a team, and cohesive unit wins. We'll have to see if we can carve out a unit, not just a collection of talents.


I'm all for giving this lineup a chance. I like most all of the additions. I'm coming around on Thad, though I don't love that one move the most. I can get behind a Teague/Hill swap. I even like the Al Jeff signing for cheap as a bench piece. But, there is still cause for concern, and we'll have to see what we can work out.

[Nuntius]

What you dont see as normal as the big picture. Bird has a plan. Let him run it. I believe he has earned that much.

We let Bird run his plan last year and look where it got us.

I do see the big picture. And I do agree that Bird has done a much better job this season than he did last year. But still, how good we will be hinges on what we do with Monta and the logjam at SG. This team can be great if we find a way to fix this issue.

Were discussing Hill cause thats who Teague was dealt for. You state its "lateral" move i say False. How can it be??? are you telling me that were gonna put up exact same +/- defensively and offensively?? Thats nonsense. As eluded, its a trade to substantiate Birds vision to quicken pace. Bird is completely changing the way offense will flow and PG13 get his.

I'm saying that it's a lateral move because if Monta starts then Teague won't see the ball as much as he needs to. That's all I'm saying.

Are you seriously stating that Teague and GHill is lateral move in gettting PG13 the balll1?!?? thats laughable my friend. just baseless emotionally driven opinion. Listen, I truly appreciate GHILL but he aint the superstar. PG13 is.

Ask yourself... does this move help PG score the ball without burning energy out initiating offfense??? you should know the answer. Question - does this move make PG a better defender by not having to CARRRRRY the team offesnisvily???

Need I say more.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that Teague will not be able to get the ball to PG if he doesn't have the ball. Literally, my whole point throughout this discussion is that I want to see Teague being the one handling the ball instead of Monta and that's not gonna happen if Monta starts at SG.

Regarding Ellis. re read my post. I cleearly stated in an ideal world we would just sign DeRozen or whatever other flavor of the Free Agent period we laudy daudy please. But that aint how it works. What im sayin is helluva lot worse options than Ellis.

Why the heck would we sign DeRozan? Our backcourt doesn't need more ball-dominant players. It needs less of them. That' the whole issue with why Monta doesn't fit.

yalll go about this like stats geeks. its basketball. best 5 on court win. give it a chance if thats what it be. Give Bird a chance to finalize roster.

Its July. Lets not micro analazye every little detail when we dont konw the fulll scope of what Bird has yet.

The best team on the court wins. Not the best 5 individual players. For our backcourt to win, we need Monta to come off the bench. If you disagree with that fine but please stop making my argument something that it's not.

[pacers33granger]

Well, I expect the team to put up a better ORtg. I expect us to put up a substantially worse DRtg. The question is whether we can outpace the drop off in defense with better offense, and I'm just not sure we can. I expect to lose quite a bit of that premium we used to run on (defense).

Why a substantial drop though? It's not like Hill is lightyears ahead of Teague on defense. Better, definitely, but it's a small drop off there imo. Also, Teague will likely be better guarding the quick PGs. Hill just didn't have the speed to keep up with someone like Lillard.

And I don't see Thad as much of a drop off from who we were starting at PF most of the time. He's certainly better than Miles on defense there and probably comparable to Lavoy. Jefferson is a sieve on defense, but Jordan Hill isn't much better.

I mean I guess it all kind of depends on how Turner progresses, but given his in-season progression and a full offseason of bulking up and understanding the game, I'd expect him to be much better on that end (as opposed to missing rotations, etc.).

Overall I have faith that Burke will be able to make it function. We've signed several guys who were notorious for being negatives on defense in the past few years and they've, for the most part, been at least passable. Ellis, Miles, Stuckey, Jordan Hill, Ty Lawson all didn't really hurt us too too much last year. Plus it seems like the coaching staff wants the young guys like GRIII and Young to work on their defense this offseason, so we'll see how that works.

Where we tended to run into problems on defense before was with guys who had low or no basketball IQ. A lot of defense is just being in the right spot. Guys like Budinger had no idea where to be and that hurt (Turner too, but he was 19 so it's understandable with him).

[Wizop]

PG is not Reggie. He's not dependent on anyone to get him a shot. And Monta was a decent passer last year. I really don't understand why having two passers is a bad thing. I understand the need for defense and shooting but playing two point guards together isn't unheard of.

Sent from my 831C using RealGM mobile app