The 7 Biggest Questions for the Indiana Pacers Going into the 2016-17 Season

The Indiana Pacers have a lot of talent and very high ceiling, but many uncertainties loom. Will they be able to overcome these seven questions to reach their potential?

The Indiana Pacers season is finally upon us. After a summer in which Larry Bird overhauled the roster, we will finally get to see what this new assembly can do.

While the team has many good players — arguably more talent than it had in its Eastern Conference finals years — it remains to be seen how they will all fit together.

There are many questions. We have touched on the biggest throughout the offseason, and now we offer this summary of the key issues that the coaches and players must figure out if they wants to reach their potential.

In addition to reading up and perusing the links below, do check out some of our other key season preview coverage:

1. Can Nate McMillan Push the Pace Effectively?

The Indiana Pacers want to play faster and score more points. Larry Bird was even kind enough to put a number on it: 105 points per game.

The acquisition of Jeff Teague and Thaddeus Young showed that Bird was serious in a way he hadn’t been able to show tangibly the previous summer when he asked Frank Vogel to do the same thing. Grabbing Aaron Brooks off the bargain bin also was a nice move in the stated direction.

The Al Jefferson signing didn’t really fit this goal. But you can’t pass up on adding such a talented player on such an incredible contract just because he doesn’t tick the exact stylistic box you’re moving towards.

And by playing Thad at the four, the team will very quick and potentially very potent in transition. They will have four starters who can bring the ball up the floor and they will get into their sets much faster than Pacers fans will be accustomed to. Expect this to be the most exciting Pacers style of play in like a decade.

The big question, however, is whether Nate McMillan can craft an attack that is both uptempo and effective. Scoring a lot of points is great, but it doesn’t always make for good discipline on the other end or lead to wins.

Moreover, McMillan has been the fourth-slowest-playing coach — out of 95 studied coaches — since 2001. His offenses in Seattle and Portland were often good. Some were excellent. One was the best in the league. But they were never fast.

Can he adapt to a new style and make it work?

Required Reading on McMillan and Small Ball:

2. Can Teague and Monta Coexist?

While both Jeff Teague and Monta Ellis fit the bill for a team that pushes and wants to score a lot, they are very similar. Both are small, both like the ball in their hands, both penetrate a lot, both can’t shoot. Aren’t they too redundant to play beside one another? Can this work? Who is going to defend tall two guards?

The Teague/Monta dynamic is a microcosm for something across the board. This team lacks shooting and defense, and the individual players may not be ideal complements for one another. If you were building a team from scratch, the skill sets of everyone on the roster tend to duplicate one another and there is a lack of specialists.

But will that matter? Versatility certainly seems key in the modern NBA, especially in the playoffs. Will talent alone be enough in the regular season, however? Few squads can match a top six of Paul George, Myles Turner, Jeff Teague, Monta Ellis, Thaddeus Young, and Al Jeffersons.

Will the Pacers get by on talent or will the ill-fitting aspects of the team design, like Teague and Monta together in a back court, hamstring the team all year?

Required Reading on Monta and Teague:

3. How Far Will the Defense Fall?

Larry Bird has liked to tell everyone who will listen that Dan Burke is planning to ensure that the defense remains stout. He was a Vogel assistant (and has been with the Pacers for some two decades) and will help McMillan keep things ship shape.

First off, this seems highly optimistic.

Regardless of the schemes, the head coach is the one who sets team priorities. Their personality, in the best cases, is what defines how the team plays. Nate isn’t a bad defensive coach, but his teams have rarely been imposing on that end of the floor. There is little evidence that he will oversee a first-rate defense.

Secondly, the team didn’t just lose defensive guru Frank Vogel. Ian Mahinmi is in Washington and George Hill is in Utah. These were the second- and third-best defenders on the roster after Paul George. They have not been replaced.

So in order to remain competent defensively, Indiana needs to find a way to overcome the loss of both its figurehead and its key defensive players. Can they do that? How?

Required Reading:

4. Who Will Make 3-Pointers?

Paul George can hit 3s. So can C.J. Miles. And Aaron Brooks has had some good seasons behind the arc. Other than that? Nobody on the Pacers has been a good shooter from deep in their careers — and even PG, C.J., and Brooks are streaky.

Nate McMillan’s offense doesn’t have a single knock-down sniper, while three of his starters — Monta, Thad, and Teague — are non-shooters. Teague did hit a (by far) career-best 40.0% from deep last year, but that would seem more of an aberration than a sign of things to come for a 28-year-old. Myles Turner has a nice jumper from 20 feet but anything beyond that is asking a lot. Rodney Stuckey had an outlier hot year in his first season with Indiana, but it looks unrepeatable.

Where will the space come from in the half court? If defenses don’t respect Indiana’s range — and the offense can’t make ‘em pay for the disrespect — the paint could get awfully crowded and prevent Monta, Teague, and Thad from doing what they do best: getting in the lane.

Required Reading:

5. Is Myles Turner Ready to Anchor a Defense?

Myles Turner has so much potential. But he is just 20. And the team is asking him to be essentially the only rim protector on the team while also being the main rebounder.

He can block shots.

We know this.

But swatting a couple of attempts per game is not protecting the rim. Those who have come before him — Roy Hibbert and Ian Mahinmi — are two of the best to have done it over the past half decade. Myles needs to get closer to their level — and fast. And it will be doubly difficult given the modern era of smaller lineups that means he cannot simply camp in the paint.

Teams are going to through small-ball lineups at the Pacers and try to exploit Myles in the pick-and-roll. It happened last year and he often was flummoxed.

His lateral quickness is not great and his footwork needs work. He must learn to stay out of foul trouble. He must maintain his balance and not get beaten for position.

His offense will be excellent. His jumper is great. But the Pacers really need him to play defense. Can he do it for 82 games while learning on the job?

Required Reading:

6. Will the Bench Actually Become a Strength?

The Pacers likely would have beaten the Toronto Raptors in the playoffs last year if playing a bench hadn’t been requirement. But they coughed up a major lead in a crucial game and that was that.

Throughout the year — and really the whole decade — the bench was a mix of injured to ineffective to unreliable. They have bolstered things, in theory.

Al Jefferson alone will be the best bench guy Indiana has had in living memory. C.J. Miles and Rodney Stuckey are capable, especially if they don’t need to be relied on every night. Aaron Brooks is a pro with a lot of experience.

Deeper down the line, Glenn Robinson III has the potential to be a solid contributor. Kevin Seraphin has been good in the past. Lavoy Allen has proven to be a serviceable stop gap. Joe Young might have something to offer.

Can the Pacers — finally — look at the bench as a strength?

Required Reading:

7. Is Paul George Great Enough to Make Nothing Else Matter?

Lots of teams with All-NBA-level players falter. James Harden saw it all fall down last year in Houston. Save one season, the Knicks have never put enough competence around Carmelo Anthony to create a good team. John Wall flounders in Washington. Boogie Cousins hates his life.

But the Pacers are not dysfunctional like some of those franchises at their worst. They don’t tank, and have filled out a 10-man rotation with capable pros.

And they have Paul George.

Paul George plays for this team.

The Indiana Pacers employ Paul George.

While he is far from perfect, he is the best player the franchise has employed since it joined the NBA. So if he puts it all together — overcoming some of his low-efficiency play, maintaining his defensive prowess, finally getting fully past his leg injury — will anything else matter?

This is the Eastern Conference.

Only LeBron James is a better player in this half of the league. So even with deficiencies in defense and shooting, even with Monta and Teague, even with an over-reliance on a 20-year old — is Paul George good enough to smooth over all the problems for the Pacers?

Is Paul George that great?