# Paul George says he will sign a long-term contract with Pacers before the season



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

> Indiana Pacers All-Star forward Paul George said today the team’s fans don’t need to worry about him going anywhere.
> 
> Indianapolis is his professional home and he plans to be here for a long time.
> 
> “(A long-term contract) is going to get done,” George told The Indianapolis Star. “There will be a deal signed and sealed on the table before the season. We’re (George and Pacers management) on the same page.”


http://www.indystar.com/article/201...ul-George-m-not-leaving-Pacers?nclick_check=1


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

This should come as no surprise to anyone. MVPG will be in Indiana for a long time.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

He deserves a max deal, but I hope he doesn't get one. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

Good for Paul George thought the Pacer were going to be cheapskates and have him sign a cheaper max deal from another team and match it.



Knick Killer said:


> but I hope he doesn't get one.


 Why?


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

Because we already have a lot of money committed to Hibbert, West, and George Hill and I'd like to be able to have enough money to lock up Lance long term as well.


----------



## ChrisWoj (May 17, 2005)

Knick Killer said:


> Because we already have a lot of money committed to Hibbert, West, and George Hill and I'd like to be able to have enough money to lock up Lance long term as well.


Welcome to the NBA.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Why would you want to lock up Lance to a long-term contract? His skill set isn't rare or anything.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Smart move by the Pacers if/when they get it done.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Good for Indiana. George, along with Hibbert should be able to do a fantastic baby Shaquille-Kobe schtick and they're surrounded by great role players. The pacers are going to be a real threat at least in the next few years.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

ATLien said:


> Why would you want to lock up Lance to a long-term contract? His skill set isn't rare or anything.


True, but I'd still like to have cash left over to keep bringing more talent in to surround our core but thats kinda wishful thinking.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Knick Killer said:


> Because we already have a lot of money committed to Hibbert, West, and George Hill and I'd like to be able to have enough money to lock up Lance long term as well.


How much money does a guy like Lance deserve? I'm not risking shorting George and making him angry just to keep around a fringe starter like Lance Stephenson.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Melo vs. George could be a pretty great rivalry for the next few years. I wouldn't be surprised if PG surpasses him as a player in the next year or two.


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Luke said:


> Melo vs. George could be a pretty great rivalry for the next few years. I wouldn't be surprised if PG surpasses him as a player in the next year or two.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


PG is already head and shoulders above Melo when it comes to D and rebounding. That won't change. But George will never be what Melo is on offense. He doesn't have the handle or the consistency to do so. 

At the end of the day it will be a tossup between the two. I'd take George but I'm completely biased.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

R-Star said:


> How much money does a guy like Lance deserve? I'm not risking shorting George and making him angry just to keep around a fringe starter like Lance Stephenson.


I didn't mean just Lance. I meant also having money to afford solid role players like Lance.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Knick Killer said:


> I didn't mean just Lance. I meant also having money to afford solid role players like Lance.


We'll still have money. George will just end up taking Danny's money next year. I'm not sure what will happen to Granger, but I'd assume its a trade unless somehow George suddenly thrives at the 2.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Locking up role players? No way. Gotta try to have some cap flexibility. Definitely lock up your all-stars, though.


----------



## Bucks4Ever91 (Sep 17, 2013)

ATLien said:


> Why would you want to lock up Lance to a long-term contract? His skill set isn't rare or anything.


I agree I think he is over rated by Pacers fans.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

RollWithEm said:


> This should come as no surprise to anyone. MVPG will be in Indiana for a long time.


LeBron is the only MVP you know. Don't go giving Paul George a nickname like that, it's unjust to your king and should be considered treason


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

ATLien said:


> Why would you want to lock up Lance to a long-term contract? His skill set isn't rare or anything.


Actually, it is. He has one of the best handles for a 2-guard in the entire league. He can get anywhere on the court he wants with the ball in his hands. The problem before this year was that he didn't know what to do when he got to that spot, but that changed this past season. His IQ is much better, his shot looks good, and he looks like he kind of knows what's happening on defense now. Also, he's turned into one of the best rebounders for a SG as well. I'd say that's a rare skill set and one worth keeping around.

If we can bring him back for 3 years/18-20 mil, I think that'd be perfect. It'll just be hard to find the money given what West, Hibbert, and Hill make. Danny Granger's a goner. And I'm still not sure he'll be able to play this year.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

Pacers Fan said:


> Actually, it is. He has one of the best handles for a 2-guard in the entire league. He can get anywhere on the court he wants with the ball in his hands. The problem before this year was that he didn't know what to do when he got to that spot, but that changed this past season. His IQ is much better, his shot looks good, and he looks like he kind of knows what's happening on defense now. Also, he's turned into one of the best rebounders for a SG as well. I'd say that's a rare skill set and one worth keeping around.
> 
> If we can bring him back for 3 years/18-20 mil, I think that'd be perfect. It'll just be hard to find the money given what West, Hibbert, and Hill make. Danny Granger's a goner. *And I'm still not sure he'll be able to play this year.*


What makes you say that? I haven't really heard much about him this off-seaon.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Knick Killer said:


> What makes you say that? I haven't really heard much about him this off-seaon.


Exactly that. If he were going to come back and play at a good level, I feel like I'd hear more about it. Instead, all I've heard is Bird saying he won't trade him and that he'll come back strong, and teammates being vague.

He missed almost all of last year not due to a specific, treatable injury, but because of excessive wear on his knees. He tried to come back, apparently still too early, and his knees got worse. If he's been taking it easy and rehabbing all summer, it's still going to take him forever to get his shot and feel for the game back, if he's even ready for training camp/the regular season. And we have no indication that his knees won't flare up again. I'm just afraid we have another Brandon Roy situation here. I hope not.


----------



## Bucks4Ever91 (Sep 17, 2013)

Pacers Fan said:


> Actually, it is. He has one of the best handles for a 2-guard in the entire league. He can get anywhere on the court he wants with the ball in his hands. The problem before this year was that he didn't know what to do when he got to that spot, but that changed this past season. His IQ is much better, his shot looks good, and he looks like he kind of knows what's happening on defense now. Also, he's turned into one of the best rebounders for a SG as well. I'd say that's a rare skill set and one worth keeping around.
> 
> If we can bring him back for 3 years/18-20 mil, I think that'd be perfect. It'll just be hard to find the money given what West, Hibbert, and Hill make. Danny Granger's a goner. And I'm still not sure he'll be able to play this year.


But he is not a good shooter, and not as great in the lane as he gets credit for so why give him the ball as a shooting guard who can't shoot just for him to pass it? That's what point guards are for and he is not a point guard.


----------



## Bucks4Ever91 (Sep 17, 2013)

LeGoat06 said:


> LeBron is the only MVP you know. Don't go giving Paul George a nickname like that, it's unjust to your king and should be considered treason


Psh.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

RebelMike09 said:


> But he is not a good shooter, and not as great in the lane as he gets credit for so why give him the ball as a shooting guard who can't shoot just for him to pass it? That's what point guards are for and he is not a point guard.


Stephenson's jump shot isn't great now, but it's somewhat streaky, which is dramatically improved from where it was before the start of last season. I don't cringe anymore when he takes open 3s and he gets hot a few times a month. Brian Shaw transformed him from a terrible jump shooter to an adequate one. Given that improvement and how good his form looks now, it's reasonable to suggest he might be better than average this year. You know, a jump from 33% last year to 36-37% this year.

His ability to get into the lane is a little more complex than you realize. I don't think anyone's giving him much credit for his attacking ability. He can blow by defenders some times and finish on occasion, but he's not a great scorer. The point I was making is that he can get to spots to make plays. That's big for team basketball since he's adept at making plays for himself and others.

Basketball is also much more complex than you're describing. PGs aren't solely passers and SGs aren't purely scorers. Look at the Pacers, for instance. Paul George and Lance Stephenson are better passers than George Hill, yet Hill mans the point because he's poised and understands the game better than them both. No one wants Lance in as the primary playmaker because he's a wildcard and makes poor decisions at times. But, he fits perfectly next to George Hill who is less of a risk taker and more limited as a playmaker and ball handler.

Also, it's great to have shooting, but not necessary for everyone to be spectacular at it. We already have West and Scola who are automatic from mid-range, Hibbert who can stick jumpers, and then an abundance of 3-point shooters including Hill x 2, Granger, Copeland, OJ, and CJ Watson. Stephenson's adequate right now, but even if he doesn't improve his J much, I love what he brings to the team as a complement to everyone else, and I want him locked up long-term.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...m-knee-injury-plans-to-plan-in-some-preseason

I'm too lazy to post anything out of the article, but I'm not encouraged. It's just pure speculation, but even if Granger plays all year, I doubt he'll log more than 25-30 minutes/game. That means more of a need for Lance Stephenson, and that this is really Paul George's team.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

LeGoat06 said:


> LeBron is the only MVP you know. Don't go giving Paul George a nickname like that, it's unjust to your king and should be considered treason


Get the **** out of my thread.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> Actually, it is. He has one of the best handles for a 2-guard in the entire league. He can get anywhere on the court he wants with the ball in his hands. The problem before this year was that he didn't know what to do when he got to that spot, but that changed this past season. His IQ is much better, his shot looks good, and he looks like he kind of knows what's happening on defense now. Also, he's turned into one of the best rebounders for a SG as well. I'd say that's a rare skill set and one worth keeping around.
> 
> If we can bring him back for 3 years/18-20 mil, I think that'd be perfect. It'll just be hard to find the money given what West, Hibbert, and Hill make. Danny Granger's a goner. And I'm still not sure he'll be able to play this year.


6 to 7 mil a year for Lance? No ****ing way.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

Knick Killer said:


> What makes you say that? I haven't really heard much about him this off-seaon.


http://t.co/1u8JRWu477



> Dime: Are you restricted at all in the stuff you can do, or are you full-on right now?
> 
> DG: I'm still in the middle of my rehab. I'm in a six month rehab; I won't be six months out until October 5th… so I'm progressing to playing — I'm playing now, but I'm progressing on schedule and I'm still in the midst of my rehab.
> 
> ...


I'm worried the same thing will happen that happened last year with his injuries. I could easily see him getting through the preseason and then just tweaking his knee like he did when he tried to come back earlier this past season.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

I don't want Danny to risk anything. I think for the first half of the season, maybe up until the All-Star break, we should bring him along slowly off the bench as a spot-minute super sub for 20-25 minutes. Give Lance the start because our starting unit offensively has enough scoring options. Besides, Granger's more of a spark than Stephenson, anyway. When Danny comes in the game, we can run a few plays for him to see if he gets hot, but mainly use him as a weak side option on offense and defender/rebounder when he's playing with George and Hibbert.

He's been out of action for over a year now and it concerns me that his rehab start-point wasn't until last April. He still has work to do to get back to the Danny Granger we saw for 5 games last year, let alone the Danny Granger we've seen here the past few years.


----------



## LeGoat06 (Jun 24, 2013)

R-Star said:


> Get the **** out of my thread.


U should calm yourself brat


----------

