featured-image

Mark's Mailbag: Wrapping Up the Season

Q. Some questions that I have not seen asked, or answers to, might be:

When PG does return, no matter when that is, who on the roster will suffer the most? Who gets less minutes on the court? What will the possible rotation be?

— Rex

A. I obviously didn't get to this question before Paul George returned, but it's worth reviewing. Damo Rudež more than anyone sacrificed playing time. Frank Vogel wanted to keep him in the rotation, but it's really difficult to play three guys at any position. That would be like sleeping three in king-sized bed. George was never going to play much beyond 15 minutes, but even that took up too much time to work Rudez into the mix each game.

Rudež had played double-figure minutes for nine consecutive games before George returned against Miami. From that point on, he played 5:25, 4:28, took two DNP-CDs and then played 49 seconds in the final game at Memphis.

Still, Rudež played enough over the season to establish himself as a solid candidate for next season's rotation. When his stats are extrapolated over 36 minutes, he averaged 11.1 points, respectable for a backup. He also shot .406 from the three-point line, which is what he was brought over from Europe to do. He isn't athletic enough to be a consistent starter or a complete player – he attempted just 23 foul shots in his 1,047 minutes – but he's fundamentally sound and has a positive attitude. And for as long as they keep score, shooters will have a place in basketball.

Solomon Hill also lost some playing time. He averaged 29.5 minutes per game before George returned, and 22.9 minutes after.

Q. I have taken a lot of crap this year for being so optimistic about this year's Pacer team. I have told everyone that we are a healthy Paul George away from being better than either of the last two year's teams.

It has taken a long time, but the signs are there. Scola and Mahinmi are both playing their best basketball since joining the team, Solomon Hill has improved so much that can you imagine the clamp- down defense we will have with him and Paul on the wings and George Hill at point. Roy is still Roy, but that's OK we just need to stop trying so hard to get him the ball. David is still a rock and when George Hill plays with that chip on his shoulder we are going to be really good.

I love our second unit, I look forward to them coming in the game, Rudy plays so hard and Stuckey has been off the charts. Miles is finally looking like the player I fell in love with when he played for Sloan in Utah. Haven't even mentioned Allen, Copeland or Sloan...man we are deep. You sure couldn't say that the last couple of years.

— Tim

A. Yeah, optimism usually comes with a price, one of them being the doubts of people who only know how to view the world through mud-stained glasses. I've found they aren't usually the most successful people, and perhaps are trying to bring the rest of the world down to their level, but that's another story.

You have a valid argument. This past season's team could be brought back intact and perhaps challenge again in the Eastern Conference if Paul George returns to his former self. However, you've probably heard Larry Bird's comments at the postseason news conference. It doesn't appear some of the free agents will be brought back, and Hibbert's status is in doubt.

Stay optimistic, though. You'll save money because you won't need Botox injections to smooth out the worry lines.

Q. What should we make of Solomon Hill going forward? What is the ceiling for the guy? The effort is there, but he can be downright awful at times.

— Chalky, via Twitter

A. I can't go along with "awful." He wasn't a consistent scoring threat after the roster filled up with healthy players, but the rest of his game is solid and he showed some improvement offensively.

He'll probably go back to the bench next season, as Larry Bird said in his postseason meeting with the media. He should fare better against second-tier players. Regardless, I still consider him a keeper. He's as mature as any young player you'll find, and a very good defender. As Optimistic Tim said earlier, he and George could make a superlative defensive tandem on the wings.

Hill will solidify his place in the league as he improves his shooting. He was a mixed bag in that regard this past season. He improved his three-point percentage by about 25 points to .329, but his two-point and free throw percentages dropped slightly. He worked with a shooting coach, Mike Penberthy, last summer, and would be wise to work with one again this summer. His defense will always be a great asset, but he'll need to be a more consistent shooter to the playing time he wants. There's nothing seriously wrong with his form, so it shouldn't be that difficult.

With all the injuries early in the season, he scored in double figures 15 times in an 18-game stretch, including his career-high 28-point game against Washington. He reached double figures in just one of the final 11 games, though, because of his reduced role in the offense.

Going forward, I think he'll be a valuable bench player and spot starter who offers a well-rounded game – assuming he improves his shooting, which he'll likely do.

Q. Why did the Pacers get C.J. Miles? He's never been a great shooter. He takes horrible shots and doesn't make them. Why is it so difficult to find real three-point shooters that actually make them and can play a little defense to be able to be in the rotation.

— Andrew

A. I feel kind of bad running this question, because it came in before the end of the season – probably during a stretch when Miles wasn't shooting well.

Bottom line, Miles hit just under 40 percent of his field goal attempts and 34.5 percent of his three-point attempts. Those aren't write-home-to-mom numbers for a shooting guard, but his early-season migraines and injuries should be factored into the equation.

Over the last 12 games of the season, he averaged 19.1 points on 48 percent shooting, including 46 percent from the three-point line. He averaged 26.3 points over the last four games, hitting 48 percent of his three-pointers, along with 6.3 rebounds. That's a small sample size, sure, but those were must-win games and gave indication he's a legit clutch player. He also turned out to be a better rebounder than I expected, and his defense seemed solid.

Q. Do you feel like me that one of the best things of this season is that maybe now fans can realize they have a good starting point guard?

— Francisco (via Twitter)

A. Yes, George Hill quieted the critics who a year ago were calling for him to be traded, or brought off the bench. His improvement was the result of a dedicated summer in the gym and a more assertive approach, which meshed well with the enhanced opportunity he received from the absence of Paul George and Lance Stephenson.

If the Pacers were to pick a team MVP, Hill would be it. He deserves some consideration for the Most Improved Player award previously won by Pacers Jalen Rose, Jermaine O'Neal, Danny Granger and Paul George, although players who have been in the league as long as him don't generally win that award.

Check out the comparison of his stats, however:

2013-14: 76 games, 32.0 minutes per game, .442 field goal percentange, .365 3-point percentage, 3.7 rebounds per game, 3.5 assists per game, 10.3 points per game
2014-15: 43 games, 29.5 minues per game, .477 field goal percentage, .358 3-point percentage, 4.2 rebounds per game, 5.1 assists per game, 16.1 points per game

Hill played less minutes per game (because of the limitation when he first came back from his injury) but overall was far more productive than the previous season. He had to be because of all the other injuries, but there was no doubt he was a different player than the one who deferred so often to teammates the previous seasons.

He'll need to maintain the same approach next season, obviously.

Q. So now the question is, what are the Pacers going to do with their draft choice? Which position do you see the greatest need or do they go for best player available?

— Matt

A. Larry Bird said in his postmortem that he'll likely go with the best available player. That's usually the case for most teams, and it should be. You might prefer a player of a certain position, but you can't pass up a potentially great player for a potentially good one just because of position. The graveyard of former GM's is littered with guys who went for a certain type of player, only to be embarrassed in future years when fans could go back and look at all the better players who were drafted later.

The ultimate example is Portland drafting Sam Bowie instead of Michael Jordan in 1984. The logic was, it already had Clyde Drexler, and Jordan seemed a duplicate. It needed a "big," so it drafted Bowie.

You might think the Pacers should go for a power forward to replace David West and Luis Scola someday, but they can't afford to pass up a player at another position with more potential. Remember, some analysts gave poor grades to the Pacers for drafting Paul George because they thought he was too similar to Danny Granger. As it turned out, they needed George to replace Granger.

The Pacers will draft 11th. This is regarded as a deep draft, and with all the underclassmen in it, there's a good chance a future star will be available when their turn comes up. But who will that be? It's difficult to project the future of a 19-year-old kid. It requires a lot of homework and a little luck to get it right.

Q. What is the Pacers' all-time record in the various throwback jerseys? We Pacers fans have gotten pretty superstitious about the triumphant qualities of the Flo-Jos.

— Chris

A. I have no idea, and I doubt it's possible to find out. The Pacers were 7-1 this season in their Flo-Jos, but nobody has kept count for the other throwbacks.

The players liked the Flo-Jos, and joined you in your superstitious nature. That tends to happen when wins pile up. They were supposed to wear them for just six games, but after winning all of those, lobbied to continue wearing them. The NBA granted permission to wear them twice more. They won at Detroit in the seventh game, but lost at Memphis in the final game of the season. Ultimately, the Flo-Jos were no match for fatigue and Marc Gasol.

I don't believe they'll be allowed to wear them again next season, but I have an alternative plan: Move the design on the right side of the uniform to the left, and call them the Jo-Flos. So far, the idea hasn't caught on. Hard to believe, isn't it?

Q. As an Indiana Pacers fan since "day one," I just want to thank you for the article regarding Dancin' Harry. I was wondering what ever happened to him, so it is good to know he is still around.

Any chance there could be future articles regarding the history of the Indiana Pacers, so that those that are not old enough to know the history can appreciate what the team went through to get to the status of today?

— Gary

A. I've written some articles related to the ABA days, mostly on people from that era. I've written lengthy features on Mel Daniels, Roger Brown, Freddie Lewis, Warren Jabali, Dan Roundfield, <a href="https://www.nba.com/pacers/news/jerry-harkness-plays-game-changing-role-basketball-history-part-1"Jerry Harkness, Slick and Nancy Leonard, the franchise-saving telethon (which is supposed to be the subject of a 30 for 30 short on ESPN), and some of the playoff games. I believe they can be found on the website, if you know where to look.

Q. Long time Pacers fan (watched Reggie versus the Knicks last night on ESPN 2 for maybe the 20th time. Never gets old. Can't believe how many fights team's got in versus today when everyone is hugging one another but I digress).

How can you not love this team that refused to tank or give up? To me, it's unbelievable they have a shot at the playoffs. A credit to the organization from top down. In addition, Frank never ceases to amaze me with his upbeat demeanor. As a former player and head college coach, I can say I've done nothing but enjoy rooting for these guys.
How do you think next year will play out at the four position? To me, Roy's digressed in almost every offensive category, so it's really critical to have a shot at building toward a championship. Who gave him the green light to start shooting 12-15 foot jumpers? In this offense/year we've gotten the most consistent production from the four spot, but Father Time always wins. I don't see any real strong possibilities already in the league, but depending on where the Pacers end up in the draft, they could get someone. But that player would take a year or two to develop into a top notch front-line player. Don't think we can keep both Luis and David. Both class acts and good to very good ballplayers. I know we have some cap space.

— David

A. I wouldn't be at all surprised if West and Scola both are back at power forward next season, flexing their 35-year-old. And I would be fine with that.

West had a frustrating season, badly spraining an ankle in the pre-season, then suffering an allergic reaction late in the season. Those aren't age-related conditions; they could happen to a 20-year-old just as easily. He never seemed to get in a groove, as the players around him kept changing and the team tried to get Hibbert more involved.

His stats (11.7 points, 6.8 rebounds) were down from previous seasons, but that was largely due to a drop in playing time. On a per-36-minute basis, his rebounding was the same and his scoring only slightly down. I believe he can be productive again next season if he remains healthy. He's obviously past his prime, but takes care of himself and will always have the knack for making winning plays at the end of close games, as he did this past season.

West's season reminded me of Reggie Miller in the 2002-03 season. His scoring average dropped four points to 12.6 and his shooting percentages declined as well, but there was a simple reason: He was playing on two bad ankles, one of which required surgery after the season. He average declined to 10 points the following season because he took a lesser role in the offense, but he averaged 14.8 in his final season, at age 39. His stats had more to do with health and opportunity than age.
Scola is a freak of nature, because of the way he takes care of himself. He was better this past season than in 2013-14, averaging 9.4 points and 6.5 rebounds in 20.5 minutes per game. He played in every game but the one in which Frank Vogel held him out to give time to Lavoy Allen.

It's not a coincidence. His diet is free of sugar, gluten and dairy. He's never missed an NBA practice because of illness, and he had the second-longest streak of consecutive games until Vogel sat him out. He hopes to play past the age of 40, and I wouldn't count him out. Forget his age, and go with the eye test.

West and Scola combine to make a solid tandem at power forward, and should be able to continue to do so for another season. The Pacers are still in a win-now mode, so there's no reason to begin a youth movement at that position. Time will tell whether it's possible to keep Scola, but he's indicated to me he wants to stay in Indianapolis. If West retires after next season as expected, I wouldn't be surprised if Scola is kept beyond that.

I've never been a believer in that "age is just a number" philosophy. It means a lot, actually. But it means a lot less for Scola than most people.

Have a question for Mark? Want it to be on Pacers.com? Email him at askmontieth@gmail.com and you could be featured in his next mailbag.

Note: The contents of this page have not been reviewed or endorsed by the Indiana Pacers. All opinions expressed by Mark Montieth are solely his own and do not reflect the opinions of the Indiana Pacers, their partners, or sponsors.