Apparently Larry Bird was serious when he said the Indiana Pacers were going for a smaller and faster style for the 2015-16 season. Gone are David West, Roy Hibbert, Luis Scola, C.J. Watson and Chris Copeland. Coming in their place are Chase Budinger, Jordan Hill and Monta Ellis as well as draft picks Myles Turner and Joe Young.
Times are a changin’ in Indiana.
The 8 Points, 9 Seconds roundtable turns and face the strange cha-cha-changes to the Indiana Pacers roster and try to get a handle on what the team will be like going forward.
Next: The Roy Hibbert Trade
What was your initial reaction to the Roy Hibbert trade and do you think it made the Pacers better or worse than if they kept him for one more season?
Tim Donahue: My initial reaction was, “Boy, Bird really, REALLY wanted to get rid of Roy.” That the market for Hibbert was only a second-round pick wasn’t particularly surprising — see Zach Lowe’s discussion of Hibbert from late June. It was shocking, however, to see the Pacers concede the point less than a week into free agency. How much of the Pacers’ improvement or decline next season will be attributable to Hibbert’s absence is impossible to objectively measure. However, I think moving on from both Hibbert’s strengths and limitations gives Indiana a greater chance of being better, sooner, than sticking with him for another year would.
Will Furr: It felt a bit like the Pacers were giving him away for nothing, but his mopey attitude and recent struggles on offense combined with Larry Bird’s trashing of him in the media drove his value way down.
Just two to three years ago, the concept of trading a truly exception rim defender who wasn’t a total minus on offense for a 2nd round pick was insane. Wait, that’s still insane. … I digress.
Just two to three years ago, the concept of trading a truly exception rim defender who wasn’t a total minus on offense for a 2nd round pick was insane. Wait, that’s still insane. … I digress. The Pacers probably would’ve been a better team with Roy and Luis Scola manning the 5 and 4 spots, running it back, and doing the same thing, but they probably weren’t winning a title with that front line. The Pacers may take a step back, but it’s in an attempt to take several steps forward.
Jeremy Comstock: My initial reaction to the Hibbert trade? I fell to my knees hollering “Praise Jesus!” Do I think it made the Pacers better or worse? Neither. At the beginning of the offseason, they had two possible paths: 1. To bring the band back for one more tour and hope to recapture some of the pre-Struggle magic sans-Lance; 2. To “rebuild on the fly” and try to make the playoffs with a new look roster. Once West opted out, the first path disappeared, and trading Roy became the only reasonable option for both parties. They used the money to sign decent role-players to decent contracts, and Roy gets to play somewhere at the molasses-level pace that is his only avenue for NBA success.
Whitney Medworth: Shocked. I couldn’t believe they pulled it off so quickly. Looking back now, I guess he was always going to find a home on a team that missed out in free agency, but I thought it would come at the trade deadline. And ultimately, this is best. We weren’t going to get a Roy Hibbert resurgence this year no matter how bad we wanted one. The break up was necessary.
Dylan Hughes: I had lost hope a Roy Hibbert trade would actually happen after DeAndre Jordan agreed to sign with Dallas, emphasis on “agreed” and not so much “sign.” A trade with the Clippers was a possibility, but it seemed like they were looking at Kosta Koufos and JaVale McGee first. If they were looking at JaVale McGee first, it was time to move on. Dallas made a lot of sense with the possibility of a Monta Ellis sign-and-trade, although I have no idea if that would actually be better cap-wise than just signing Ellis outright. If it would be better, I couldn’t explain why. Portland made a lot of sense with their amount of cap space, but so did the Lakers after striking out on everyone else. I think the trade was good despite the little return. There was no way they got much out of a salary dump, no matter how much a team might have wanted/needed him. Because frankly, a team never needs Roy Hibbert. His rim protection is very valuable, but everything else is meh.
Next: David West is Gone
Were you surprised David West turned down a $12 million player option from the Pacers to play with the San Antonio Spurs on a minimum contract?
Donahue: It was somewhat surprising to me that West chose not to pick up his player option for the Pacers, but I was not surprised to see him end up taking considerably less money in exchange for a chance to win big. The Pacers can’t show a clear path to contention — especially in the short term — and that hurt them with West more than any other consideration.
Furr: I was not. I actually thought David West would retire this season, but pulling a Karl Malone was 2nd on my list of guesses. I think West had a bond with Roy Hibbert, and Bird’s comments to the media might’ve irked him a bit, but I don’t think it was the deciding factor. West looked done at various points last year, and when he said the Pacers weren’t a contender, I don’t think he was talking 2-3 years; I think West thinks he has a year left, and wanted the best chance to win a title in the upcoming season. Backing up LaMarcus Aldridge and Timmy Duncan gives his pretty damn good odds.
Comstock: I was surprised that West opted out, mainly because Bird seemed to think his return was all but guaranteed. Once he opted out, his signing cheap with a contender didn’t surprise me at all.
David West was down right depressed at the start of last season. Media day resembled a funeral.
Medworth: This is another one where I was completely caught off guard at first. Once we started to hear more about the situation, it made sense. And if you remember, David West was down right depressed at the start of last season. Media day resembled a funeral. I will miss him and I really hate it had to end this way. David West was arguably the most important piece to the Pacers recent rise. But I wish him the best and hope he has success in San Antonio.
Hughes: I was actually shocked. Even though Hibbert would have made more money, it was inevitable to me that if only one returned it would be West. I thought there was a chance Roy would opt out, although that thought probably was more of a hope and I somehow convinced myself it could happen from that. I don’t think what he said about Bird’s comments on Hibbert was a game-changing part of his decision, but it was maybe the cherry on top to his other reasons. Forget the money, the fact that he actually ended up with a team that could very well win it all this season is kind of surprising but awesome at the same time.
Next: Does Monta Ellis make the Pacers better?
Does Monta Ellis make the Indiana Pacers a better basketball team?
Donahue: By himself? No. Ellis offers some scoring and some ball-handling, but isn’t great at either shooting or defense, so he’s not going to be a difference maker. What will matter will be how well he fits with George Hill, Paul George, Rodney Stuckey and the other Pacers. He’ll be taking minutes that were manned by guys like Donald Sloan and Solomon Hill, so they’ll move forward, but how much will depend on the overall mesh of the unit.
Furr: I think the Pacers have 2 guys who are suited for the 6th man role in Rodney Stuckey and Monta Ellis; unfortunately, that means one of them winds up as a starter. I do think that playing Ellis alongside George Hill has some serious benefits, however. Ellis is a more polished attacker and can take a good amount of the ball handling duties from Hill and Paul George, giving both some freedom. Ellis has not exactly been a positive on the court force during his various stops in the association, but his biggest strength (attacking the basket, creating shots) is something the Pacers have lacked in previous years, and could mesh well with the offensive machine that Larry Bird is trying to create.
More from Pacers News
- 2 Studs, 1 dud from gut-wrenching Indiana Pacers loss to Charlotte Hornets
- Handing out early-season grades for Pacers’ Bruce Brown, Obi Toppin
- 3 positives, 2 negatives in Pacers In-Season Tournament win vs. Cavaliers
- 2 positives, 3 negatives from first week of Indiana Pacers basketball
- Should Isaiah Jackson’s days with Indiana Pacers be numbered?
Comstock: Without question, yes. Ellis is, by far, the best offensive player on the roster, and either the 2nd or 3rd best overall player – depending on whether or not George Hill is able to maintain last year’s level of play. Rick Carlisle was able to craft a historically great offense with Monta last season until the Mavs foolishly traded for Rondo and derailed their season. Now it’s up to Vogel to do the same.
Medworth: He won’t make the Pacers worse. They need guys that can score buckets and he brings that. I also think the Pacers will be able to make up for him defensively so I don’t think there is any way he makes the Pacers worse. But make them better? We’ll have to wait and see. I sure hope.
Hughes: No question. I look back at the days when Lance Stephenson essentially ran the point and how good that team was pre-The Struggle. With more offensive firepower around Ellis than Lance had, including blonde George Hill and not blonde C.J. Miles spotting-up on the perimeter with Myles Turner as a pick-and-roll partner, he should have an easy time succeeding. And let’s not forget Paul George having mismatches with power forwards, too. Ellis can feed PG and watch him work.
Next: Who Ya Got: Chase Budinger or Jordan Hill?
Between Chase Budinger and Jordan Hill, who will have a bigger impact on the Pacers next season.
Donahue: Chase Budinger probably offers the greater opportunity for impact, but Jordan Hill will probably have the greater opportunity. If Budinger is healthy and can return to some semblance of his pre-injury form, then he brings tools and size that will be very welcome. However, those are big ifs, and he’s entering a crowded minutes situation. Jordan Hill probably has the edge on big minutes — and possibly a starting role — as one of the few experienced big men on the Pacers. How he does with that chance will probably matter more to Indiana this year.
Furr: I expect Jordan Hill to wind up starting; I’m not sure we see Budinger in more than 40 or so games. Budinger was someone who had a bright future years back, but several knee injuries later, and it’s not apparent whether he can stay healthy. I think Jordan Hill, on the other hand, winds up being a serviceable small ball big man. I don’t see him as an all-star, but I think he’ll be fine running the court, rebounding, and being tall on defense. I didn’t like the Rudez for Budinger trade, but it’s true that Bud probably has more potential, if his health somehow holds up.
Comstock: A pre-injury Chase Budinger was a far better player than Jordan Hill, but no one knows if that player will ever return. I’ll say Hill will have the bigger impact just because the Pacers will have no choice but to play him a fairly significant number of minutes given the lack of other proven bigs on the roster.
Medworth: Jordan Hill simply because of minutes. Chase has to share time with C.J. Miles and Paul George and even though the plan is to go smaller, I just think he will be trying to fit in to a crowded area. Whereas Roy and David both left holes that Jordan Hill can immediately fill.
Hughes: Jordan Hill should. Budinger will be in the rotation, but if PG starts at power forward, I don’t see Miles losing the starting 3 job to Bud. If PG doesn’t start at power forward, Hill should be starting there and could start at the 5 if PG is at the 4.
Next: Turning Over The Bench
Between C.J. Watson, Luis Scola, and Chris Copeland leaving, which player will the Pacers miss the most?
Donahue: The Pacers will miss Luis Scola the most in the short term. Given his skills and the money he commanded, he would have been a really good short-minute starter at the 4 next season. He also would have been a nice security blanket for Frank Vogel, but not one warm enough to preclude the experimentation Bird wants. However, this is all relative, and it’s hard to say with conviction that any of these players make a difference in the win column.
Furr: Seeing as the Pacers don’t currently have a true point guard on their roster, I’m tempted to go with C.J. Watson, but my heart tells me Luis Scola. Scola was reliable and durable, and I really thought the team would bring him back and give him starter’s minutes this year. Watson lacked the ability to stay healthy, and missed crucial stretches the past two years. Scola played his heart out, never missed a game due to injury, and had a 2nd quarter for the ages that probably won the Pacers a home game they desperately needed in the playoffs against the Hawks. Plus, hearing @grady announce LuuuuiiiiiiiiiisssssScolaaaaaaa was always a treat.
Comstock: Scola because I loved his floppy hair and high school volleyball player headbands. I won’t really miss any of them though.
Medworth: I’ll miss 2nd-year-Pacer Luis the most. He was great for the team last season and played hard 100% of the time. There is going to be a Raptors-Pacers game where he plays really well and I’m going to be pretty sad he left us.
Hughes: I will miss Cope’s dreads but that’s about it. I will miss the game every once in a while where C.J. Watson gets hot from 3 and starts shooting them in transition and draining them and dropping my jaw, but he did get hurt a lot. I will miss everything about Luis Scola, from his hair to his hustle. I was in the small minority that I wasn’t opposed to bringing Luis back to start at power forward with Lavoy Allen backing him up, but George or JHill are probably the better options there.
Next: Is PG at PF a Good Idea?
Can Paul George effectively play significant minutes at power forward?
Donahue: I don’t know, and neither do you. Really, the question is, how many minutes a night can the Pacers play without a power forward? Can they play 10? Probably. 15? Some nights, sure. 20? On rarer occasions. It’s going to vary, and some nights, playing with one big and Paul on the floor will be a nightmare for opponents. Others, it will be a nightmare for the Pacers. This is very much a transition year for Indiana and their identity. It’s not about knowing if PG can be a small-ball 4. It’s about finding out.
Furr: With today’s NBA, I think he can, butthe Pacers would be remiss to play him more than 20 or so minutes per game at the 4. I think he’s healthy and will have significant advantages as a small ball 4, but there are a lot of matchups where his all world perimeter defense will be wasted. PG will probably be an all star whether he’s playing 2, 3, or 4, but I’m not sure the 4 is the best way to utilize his talent and unique skill set.
Comstock: I’ve wanted George to play some smallball PF since he reportedly grew 2 inches after his rookie season. I don’t know how much he’ll play or how good he’ll be at it, but I’m excited to watch and find out.
Medworth: I have no idea. That’s what training camp and the beginning of the season are for. All I know is I was really happy to see those videos from his Nike event this week in the Philippines. I don’t care what position he plays as long as he’s healthy.
Hughes: I am not convinced this would be a good move but am not convinced it would be a bad move either. There is no risk in just keeping him at small forward, but what Larry said about how playing the 4 would help him because he wouldn’t have to chase guys around the perimeter was interesting to me. Playing at power forward would almost force him to bulk up to take that pounding, but I don’t know if he can ever be as good a post defender as perimeter defender no matter how big he is. While playing bigger, slower guys on offense would benefit Paul, his defense is really what sets him apart and putting him on guys that will post up more might take away some of what makes him great.
Next: Grade the Indiana Pacers Offseason
How would you grade the Indiana Pacers offseason as a whole and do you think the team is headed in the right direction?
Donahue: Incomplete. The transition from “Smashmouth” to “Faster & Smaller” has been pretty abrupt, and there are plenty of indications that it hasn’t been thought all the way through. Bird himself acknowledged that David West’s departure – very much a surprise to the team — caused them to accelerate their reinvention. Mistakes have been made, but mostly ones of form more than function. The cognitive dissonance evident between Bird, Frank Vogel, and Paul George is to be expected in such a situation, and can only be resolved over time. On the whole, leaning into the change the way Bird has may be the best approach, but it is not without its penalties. The quality of this summer’s moves will be best defined by what comes next.
Furr: I give the Pacers a B. I don’t think they saw David West’s opt out coming, but seized the opportunity to move in a direction they had been wanting to, and did it with gusto. I think a large number of teams would’ve played for the draft and wasted a year of PG’s prime in hopes of landing a high lottery pick next year; say what you will about Larry Bird, Donnie Walsh and company, but this team never gives up a season. I think that’s an admirable quality in today’s world, and one of the reasons I love this team so much. They’re always trying to win, and the moves they made this year were in hopes of making a better team moving forward.
Comstock: For the last few years, the right direction for the team in my mind has always been “away from Hibbert,” so I obviously like at least one of the offseason moves. Aesthetically, I’m excited about how the will play moving forward, but ultimately I think you can win consistently with any style as long as you have a well-constructed roster. Overall, I’d give the Pacers a ‘B’ for this offseason. They’ve added talented players on reasonable contracts in free agency, and Turner and Young look like keepers.
Medworth: Larry and Co. have done the best they could with the cards they were dealt. They got rid of Roy’s contract without having to take back Swaggy P in return. They got a lineup that will go small and score more, which is becoming the way of the NBA. And they were never going to get DeAndre Jordan or LaMarcus Aldridge, so I do think they did just about as well as they could have. The most important thing to me is Paul George’s health. If he’s back, the Pacers are back.
Hughes: B+. I think they did the best they could to head in the direction they want to go and I certainly think they are headed in the right direction.
Next: Indiana Pacers Changing Eras in Large Fashion
More from 8 Points, 9 Seconds
- 2 Studs, 1 dud from gut-wrenching Indiana Pacers loss to Charlotte Hornets
- Handing out early-season grades for Pacers’ Bruce Brown, Obi Toppin
- 3 positives, 2 negatives in Pacers In-Season Tournament win vs. Cavaliers
- 2 positives, 3 negatives from first week of Indiana Pacers basketball
- Should Isaiah Jackson’s days with Indiana Pacers be numbered?