This season beginning to feel similar for the Indiana Pacers

This season has been an unwelcome surprise for the Indiana Pacers.

The Indiana Pacers – for much of the last 30 years – are usually either good or an enjoyable team to watch play. Some are good and rise to the ranks of a championship contender. Think of the late-1990s or early-2010s squads.

Some teams are really fun and either make surprise runs in the playoffs or defy expectations. Think of the 2017-18 team that saw Victor Oladipo break out or the 2012-13 team that upset the Knicks in round two and nearly defeated LeBron James and the Heat.

Most seasons of Pacers basketball have, thankfully, encompassed at least one of these two aspects.

However, there have been two notable teams in the last decade that seem to ignore this pattern of success, and their similarities are numerous. One of them was the 2016-17 season when a re-tooled roster faltered and left Paul George wanting out of Indianapolis. The other is this season, and unsurprisingly, the similarities are plentiful.

From similar situations entering the season to similar performances in the season, both teams display common themes that continue to become more and more apparent.

The Coach

Nate McMillan and Nate Bjorkgren were brought in under different circumstances. McMillan, a veteran head coach in the NBA, was hired after Frank Vogel was surprisingly let go by former President of Basketball Operations Larry Bird. Most were mildly disappointed when Vogel was let go, but the hiring of McMillan was particularly maligned, as Bird hoped to play a faster and more modern style, something that McMillan was not known for.

Bjorkgren, a rookie head coach in the NBA, was hired after McMillan was swept for the third time in four years as head coach. The hire brought excitement and hope, as Bjorkgren hailed from the Nick Nurse coaching tree and was promised as someone who would bring a new philosophy to Indiana Pacers’ basketball – both on and off the court.

The two Nates found similar success in their first season and were dealt rosters that did not fit their style. McMillan began to find more success in 2017-18 when the team shed some of its defensive liabilities and re-worked the roster around Oladipo and Myles Turner.

Bjorkgren is dealing with a roster that is ill-equipped to play his style of defense. While he has made questionable coaching decisions on that side of the ball, specifically when it comes to the universal ball pressure that Pacers’ defenders apply, his personnel is not a good fit.

During his time in Toronto, Bjorkgren routinely was working with some of the more intelligent and lengthy defenders in the league. Frontline size and wingspans like O.G. Anunoby and Pascal Siakam made it difficult on passing lanes and allowed Toronto to be out of position and still contest shots. Fred VanVleet and Kyle Lowry, while undersized, are both elite defenders at the point of attack and could afford to gamble with aggressive pressure due to the size that Toronto had behind them.

This season’s Pacers roster can’t quite compare. Turner’s role defensively, as evidenced by the nearly six-point defensive rating swing in his on/off splits, has been critical to any semblance of defensive success Indiana has found, but overall, the defense has taken a large step back. While the departure of former assistant Dan Burke may have something to do with it, a 111.6 defensive rating in comparison to last season’s 108.0 number, is concerning.

Going over on every ball-screen, shading every offensive player middle, and closing out aggressively does not work with Indiana’s roster. Malcolm Brogdon isn’t quick enough to defend opposing guards in that fashion, and while Justin Holiday has been solid defensively, the wing combination of him and Caris LeVert isn’t big or long enough to cover up the mistakes. That isn’t even to mention Domantas Sabonis having to guard opposing 4’s.

Similar to McMillan in 2016-17, Bjorkgren is dealing with a team that simply isn’t fit to play the way he wants to play in his first season as head coach.

Preseason Expectations

Another common denominator between the two disappointing teams is each’s preseason expectations.

While the McMillan hire was uninspiring at the time, Bird had just taken the roster through a massive overhaul and planned on rolling out a rotation that had little resemblance to that of the team before. Jeff Teague, Thaddeus Young, and Al Jefferson were touted as key additions. Monta Ellis was supposedly healthier after dealing with nagging injury issues the season prior. Paul George was continuing to round into form after his catastrophic leg injury in 2014.

Fans and the media alike were excited to see what the Pacers could achieve. Some were even calling them the biggest threat to LeBron James’ Cleveland Cavaliers.

While the media wasn’t quite that high on the Pacers before this season, there was still some hope that they could make a push and contend for an Eastern Conference Finals spot. McMillan, despite regular season successes, had consistently been pushed around in the playoffs and with a healthy roster, there was hope Bjorkgren could get them over the hump.

There was optimism surrounding the health of Oladipo and the relationships that Bjorkgren had built with the players. During training camp and the preseason, stories consistently came out about the positive nature surrounding the team and their practices. 

In-Season Performance

Now, a look at how each team performed. If a claim is made that both teams weren’t successful or enjoyable, the play will tell the story.

The 2016-17 team got off to a solid but not a great start. Turner was beginning to solidify himself as a threat in his second NBA season and George continued to show that he was an All-Star caliber player on both ends. The team hovered around .500 for much of the opening months, until a seven-game win streak propelled them to a 29-22 record in early February. However, by the end of the month, they were back to .500.

The optimism that was brought into the season had generally waned as it was clear the roster overhaul did little to move the team forward, and the prized acquisitions were mostly disappointing. Rumors of a Paul George deal popped up at the trade deadline, but most Indiana fans were relieved to find out that was all they were – rumors. The sad Jeff Teague meme was born as apathy filled the seats in Bankers Life Fieldhouse.

Either way, the team didn’t seem to be having much fun and the rumblings of Paul George’s desires for free agency began to creep into the conversation surrounding the team. 

Fast forward to this season, and a similar story is being told.

A 7-4 start with a first-year head coach had fans optimistic, and little changed after Oladipo was traded for Caris LeVert – a trade that most declared a “win” for Indiana. Then, as the dust settled from the trade, the Pacers began to settle themselves, into the background of the league. As they usually do, they seemed destined for a top-five seed in the East, and that was that. Most around the league assumed they would win 45+ games, Domantas Sabonis and Malcolm Brogdon would continue their reign as the league’s “most underrated players,” and that Indiana would pop back up come playoff time.

Then, they began to slip. By early February, they were below .500 at 12-13. Injuries were used as an easy write-off for the struggles, but defensive issues continued to crop up. The team did briefly pop back up above .500 after an OT win against Minnesota, but since then, has fallen back to the play-in realm in the East.

Much like in 2016-17, there were reports of Indiana’s stars being on the market. Brogdon and Sabonis were both rumored to be available for the right price, and fans grew increasingly unhappy with the play on the court. Now, in the same way as 2016-17, Indiana finds itself mired in a disappointing and unexciting season that will require a strong finish to crack the playoffs– a spot that the Pacers typically make with relative ease.

Other Statistical Similarities

All of the above may point to a similar “feel” around each season, but is there a statistical correlation between the two teams?

Let’s take a look at the Four Factor stats, or what Dean Oliver dubbed the “Four Factors of Basketball Success.” Those four are a teams’ shooting, turnovers, rebounding, and free throws.

2016-17 Indiana Pacers – ranks in the NBA

Effective Field Goal % (Shooting) – No. 13

FT Attempt Rate (Free Throws) – No. 19

Turnover % (Turnovers) – No. 15

DREB % (Defensive Rebounding) – No. 24

OREB% (Offensive Rebounding) – No. 26

Opponent

EFG% – No. 15

FT Attempt Rate – No. 23

Turnover % – No. 6

OREB % – No. 24

2020-21 Indiana Pacers – ranks in the NBA

EFG% – No. 12

FT Attempt Rate – No. 24

Turnover % – No. 13

DREB % – No. 29

OREB% – No. 22

Opponent (ranks in the NBA)

EFG% – No. 13

FT Attempt Rate – No. 19

Turnover % – No. 5

OREB % – No. 29

A few things stand out. Both teams were bad on the glass, with neither being in the top 20 in offensive or defensive rebounding. Both were average shooting teams, and both were average in terms of defensive-shooting metrics. One of the more similar things is the turnover numbers. Both teams were and are among the best in the league at forcing turnovers, but neither was or is particularly special at limiting their own turnovers.

Shot selection, on the other hand, is nearly completely inversed. The 2016-17 team gave up some of the most three-point attempts in the league and didn’t allow many shots at the rim. This year’s team allows very few three-pointers but leads the NBA in shots allowed at the rim per game.

Offensively, the story is similar. The 2016-17 squad lived in the mid-range, while this year’s team shoots the most within the restricted area of any team in the league.

What’s Next?

Whether or not fans are pulling for a lottery pick or a high seed in the playoffs, the similarities with the 2016-17 team aren’t all bad. After the roster was re-tooled with the Paul George trade and signings of Darren Collison and Bojan Bogdanovic, the Pacers were back to competing for homecourt in the postseason. If the front office has faith in Bjorkgren, he’ll be given new pieces to work with that better fit his style of play.

While this season has been mostly forgettable, there seems to be less fatigue and negative emotion surrounding this team than there was in 2016-17. Despite the struggles in play, the roster seems to have remained relatively upbeat in both their interactions with the media and each other.

Still, much like it was four seasons ago, it’s difficult to watch a team that was so full of promise, struggle as much as they have. Hopefully, there isn’t a new version of the sad Jeff Teague meme that surfaces this year.