Nate McMillan, Frank Vogel, Larry Bird, and the Future of the Indiana Pacers.
Welcome back to the 8 Points 9 Seconds mailbag, where we take your questions and make you feel internet famous because we answered them!
We’ll be using a consistent email for this process: 8p9sAMA@gmail.com. You can feel free to shoot questions over to that email or reply on Twitter to @8pts9secs or @will_furr using hashtag #8p9sAMA or visit our Facebook page to leave comments.
You’ve got questions? We’ve got answers.
Benoît L: When Bird fired Frank Vogel, he said it was time for “new voices” to be heard. What qualifies Nate McMillian as a new voice?
Ray B: Doesn’t promoting McMillan fly in the face of everything Bird said about why Vogel was let go? Was promoting him the plan all along, or was the way Vogel was unceremoniously dumped something that scared off all other potential hires?
#8p9sAMA Who should The Pacers target in free agency and serious question should Pacers fans be worried that we hired Nate?
— FBH (@SpacialJones) May 16, 2016
On the surface, Nate McMillan is not a “new voice”, and his misses most of the marks that Larry Bird hit when he fired Vogel. McMillan has been with the team since July of 2013 (just under 3 years, for those wanting to cross reference Larry Bird’s “3 year” theory). It would seem that, if the Pacers had tuned out Frank Vogel, they had also tuned out Nate McMillan.
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?
It would also make sense that, if McMillan was a good offensive coach, the Pacers would’ve been better offensively under him. However, there’s definitely some upshot. McMillan has been a good coach in the NBA, with very efficient offenses (though very, very slow). Just having a guy on staff doesn’t equate having him as a head coach. If Vogel had his own offense installed, he may not have wanted Nate’s offensive theories and teaching. Likewise, McMillan’s voice would not have been the primary in the locker room.
Again, I’m not saying that it’s probable, but it’s possible that Nate McMillan does have a stronger voice that will catch the ears of the players, and a stronger offensive philosophy and they were just muted by being the assistant coach rather than the head honcho. It looks highly unlikely that this was “the plan”, and possibly that “the plan” existed at all. It’s hard to scare someone out of an NBA coaching job – there are only 30 in total, and rarely more than 3-4 available. The fact that the Kings keep getting coaches should prove that point easily. However, I’m sure Larry Bird’s asinine press conference didn’t curry him any favor with the coaching community, and at the very least, seemed to have turned off Jeff Van Gundy.
For more on the Nate McMillan hiring, check out the latest take by the 8 points 9 seconds staff here and here.
FBH: Who should The Pacers target in free agency and serious question should Pacers fans be worried that we hired Nate?
#8p9sAMA Who should The Pacers target in free agency and serious question should Pacers fans be worried that we hired Nate?
— FBH (@SpacialJones) May 16, 2016
To take the 2nd question first, Pacers fans shouldn’t be worried. McMillan has been a good coach throughout his career, and while he’s not necessarily exciting, his teams have scored the ball efficiently and have won at a reasonable clip in his prior stops.
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?
The Pacers SHOULD target Kevin Durant and LeBron James. Every team out there should. Short of the VERY unlikely scenario of Larry Bird convincing one of those two that Indiana is a landing spot worth leaving their current situations, there are some more realistic options. My 1A and 1B would be Mike Conley and Al Horford, with Nic Batum as a 2. The Pacers can afford a max guy by renouncing the rights to Ian Mahinmi, and if you give McMillan’s words at the press conference any credence, it sounds likely that they will. McMillan spoke of Myles Turner being best as a center, and most small market teams don’t have a 10 million dollar (or more) backup center. Running on the assumption that that happens, here’s my breakdown and reasoning for each guy.
Mike Conley
15.3 ppg, 6.1 apg, 19.3 PER, 28 years old
Mike Conley would seem to be an ideal fit for the Indiana Pacers. Larry Bird wants a point guard who plays faster and moves the ball better than George Hill, and Conley can fill those desires without sacrificing much of the shooting and defense that Hill provides. Conley went to high school in Indy at Lawrence North, so there’s an angle of hope for Pacers fans. Memphis beat writers seem relatively convinced that Conley will stay with the Grizzlies (see the quotes from him here), but he has intimated that he’d be willing to leave if the Grizzlies don’t improve in the offseason. Conley would be a coup for the Pacers, and would instantly improve their offense. George Hill is a fine NBA player, but he may be better as a 6th man/combo guard who could come in and hunt his own shot, as he had to do for the injury-ravaged 2014-2015 Pacers. It’s more likely that he’d be traded though, especially if Conley is acquired.
Al Horford
15.2 ppg, 50.5% fg, 34.4% 3pt, 7.3 rpg, 19.4 PER, 29 years old
Al Horford is about as versatile as big men come. He’s a 3 point shooting, smart passing, strong defender who rebounds, hits his free throws, and plays within himself. Horford would be a get for nearly any team out there, and it’s certain that the Hawks will make a strong pitch to resign him. There have been rumors that he was at least interested in looking around though, and the Pacers would be lucky to have him. The reason I have him listed at 1B is that he would challenge the identity that the Pacers are trying to cultivate. Signing Horford would almost certainly mean that the Pacers would be starting 2 bigs, as Myles Turner is certainly a big part of the Pacers future. Horford would instantly be the Pacers 2nd best player, at worst, and would ensure that Paul George spent most of his minutes at his preferred position of small forward. Like Conley, Horford would be a huge win for the Pacers, but it would be a zag from where Larry Bird has wanted to zig.
Nic Batum
14.9 ppg, 34.8% 3pt, 6.3 rpg, 5.9 apg, 27 years old
Nic Batum has always oozed potential as a 3 and D guy, and he broke out in his first season in Charlotte. Batum is a jack of all trades player: he shoots the 3, finishes decently, passes and rebounds, and is a very good defender. He would provide enhanced spacing over Monta Ellis in the starting lineup, and the trio of he, Goerge Hill, and Paul George would give opposing backcourts nightmares. Batum is an instant fit for most teams out there, and he can be utilized as a swiss army knife by any smart team.
There are a few concerns with Batum, though. He’s only played 80 games in a season twice in his 8 year career, and it seems likely that Larry Bird would view him as a potential answer as a small ball power forward. Batum is 2 inches taller and 31 pounds lighter that C.J. Miles per basketball-reference.com. Miles quickly wore down guarding power forwards, and Paul George loudly voiced concerns that the same would happen to him before the year. Given Batum’s slight frame and injury history, I’d be very leery of giving him a max contract to play small ball power forward.
Honorable mention
Chandler Parsons: Good shooter, possible small ball power forward fit, athletic defender who puts in a good effort on the defensive end. Injury history is a major concern.
Rajon Rondo: Assist machine, better name than player. Hasn’t defended anyone since he played for the Boston Celtics, can’t shoot, but Larry Bird has an affinity for him.
Ryan Anderson: Was the model stretch 4 before the stretch 4 was popular. Not a “small ball” power forward, but excellent 3 point shooter. Poor defender, will likely be highly sought after, resulting in a much higher price point than he should get.
Luol Deng: Getting a little long in the tooth, but could be a solid small ball power forward option. Is more of a traditional small forward, but has the strength to possibly stand up at the 4. Can shoot, is a smart team defender.
Evan Fournier: The man called “don’t google” can flat out shoot the ball, and has been a willing defender. He’s a restricted free agent, though, and Herb Simon has long not gone after RFAs.
Kent Bazemore: Long, athletic wing, still figuring things out. Came along really nicely with the Hawks, could just be scraping his potential.
Marvin Williams: Prototypical stretch 4. Can rebound and bang bodies, has struggled mightily with consistency throughout his career. Torched the Pacers last year, though, recency bias could lead Larry Bird to chase after him beyond his likely value.
Next: A Long Series of Thoughts About Nate McMillan
Still have questions? Hit us up at 8p9sAMA@gmail.com or reply on Twitter to @8pts9secs or @will_furr using hashtag #8p9sAMA. You can also send us a message on our Facebook page.