Indiana Pacers get better, maybe?
By Ian Levy
The Indiana Pacers used the three days between the end of the NBA Finals and the beginning of the NBA Draft to dramatically overhaul their roster. But did they get better?
In the space between the NBA Finals and the NBA Draft, the Indiana Pacers were, somewhat surprisingly, the biggest NBA story. First, Indiana was involved in a trade that sent George Hill to the Utah Jazz, Utah’s No. 12 pick to the Atlanta Hawks (who used it on Taurean Prince), and Jeff Teague back to the Pacers. Then the Pacers traded the No. 20 pick in the NBA Draft to the Brooklyn Nets in exchange for forward Thad Young.
From a pure talent perspective, the Pacers are probably better off. Teague is two years younger than Hill and offers a lot more as a pick-and-roll scorer and facilitator. However, he’s not nearly the defensive player Hill is, he offers less size and positional versatility, and doesn’t have the track record Hill does as a catch-and-shoot three-point threat (although this may be a function of opportunity). In the aggregate, Hill was actually much more productive in his role last season than Teague was in his.
Once upon a time, Young was a wing player but he’s been almost exclusively a small-ball four for years now. He’s athletic, active, and can be a plus defensively in the right situations. In terms of raw talent, he’s a step above any actual power forwards the Pacers had on the roster last season. The No. 20 pick, historically, doesn’t generate an overwhelming return. In addition, most rookies (especially in that range) are not immediately productive. If Indiana’s goal is to compete now, which it appears it is, then the Young deal is a clear win.
The problem, of course, is fit. While Teague is a better on-ball scorer and facilitator, it seems like that value would be eroded by needing to share the ball with Paul George, Monta Ellis, and Rodney Stuckey. In this regard, Hill was perfect because he could attack when he needed to but he was also one of the best spot-ups threats in the league. Putting the ball in Teague’s hands more often means more of Stuckey and Ellis spotting around the perimeter which is not going to be good for Indiana’s spacing.
If you include the fact that Young is not a jumpshooter — he attempted just 30 three-pointers last season and according to the NBA’s play type statistics, 56.7 percent of his offensive possessions came in transition, or on post-ups, cuts, and putbacks — and it would appear that the Indiana Pacers may have a problem spreading the floor on offense. If you take a look at the shot charts for their theoretical starting lineup next season, it looks a lot like a pace-and-no-space approach.
George and Ellis have some hot spots in the corners, and George and Teague are both threats above the arc. But Young and and Turner are going to be sharing a lot space in the mid-range — space that Ellis, Teague, and George are all going to be looking to drive into. Things don’t look much better if the re-sign Mahinmi and brining Stuckey in off the bench isn’t going to do much to help the situation either.
This roster certainly seems like it’s set up to play fast and push the ball, with an active defense looking to create turnovers and then get out and run. However, when they are forced to play in the halfcourt, it seems like this offense could end up looking frustratingly similar to the Hill-Stephenson-George-West-Hibbert group that struggled to put up points or even stay out of each other’s way.
It’s a long summer and there will be plenty more opportunities to continue tinkering on this roster. But right now it looks like the Pacers may be going all in on a pace-and-no-space approach.
For more NBA news and analysis, please check out our NBA category page.