Nick Batum or Paul George

[DukeC]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

Well he's a 3rd option on a not so great team in the better conference.

So George was voted in because the East is weaker?

I think you ignored an important point here. You see where I highlighted 3rd option? That's the overall point he was making.

He's not a better first option than Lamarcus or Lillard.

George is only ballin like he is because he's the 1st option and he only shares the majority of shots between one other person (David West who's averaging 17 and 8). Hibbert has been an absolute disappointment since he got that contract.

Meanwhile Aldrige is averaging 20 and 9 and Liilard is averaging 18 and 6.

Batum is still averaging 16 5, and 6. He's a great versatile player like Igoudala (with a better jumpshot of course) who's a good on-ball defender because he can defend multiple positions.

Paul George is averaging 17, 4 and 7.

The difference between the two is negligible. Especially considering George is taking a whole 3 shots more than Batum on average (Batum hoists up 12 and George hoists up 15 a game).

Also, intersting fact. The last time batum put up 15 shots he recorded a triple double. Something along the lines of 20, 10, and 12.

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/3416/nicolas-batum

Also has 2 triple doubles on the year.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/DoubleD****p?league=00&season=22012&conf=OVERALL&position=0&splitType=9&qualified=N&yearsExp=-1&sortOrder=7&splitDD=All%20Teams

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

I think you ignored an important point here. You see where I highlighted 3rd option? That's the overall point he was making.

He's not a better first option than Lamarcus or Lillard.

George is only ballin like he is because he's the 1st option and he only shares the majority of shots between one other person (David West who's averaging 17 and 8). Hibbert has been an absolute disappointment since he got that contract.

Meanwhile Aldrige is averaging 20 and 9 and Liilard is averaging 18 and 6.

Batum is still averaging 16 5, and 6. He's a great versatile player like Igoudala (with a better jumpshot of course) who's a good on-ball defender because he can defend multiple positions.

Paul George is averaging 17, 4 and 7.

The difference between the two is negligible. Especially considering George is taking a whole 3 shots more than Batum on average (Batum hoists up 12 and George hoists up 15 a game).

Also, intersting fact. The last time batum put up 15 shots he recorded a triple double. Something along the lines of 20, 10, and 12.

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/3416/nicolas-batum

Also has 2 triple doubles on the year.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/player...DD=All%20Teams

At the same time Defenses can focus more on George because the lack of offense of the Pacers. Whereas like u said Batum is not ahead of Lillard or Aldridge in teams of Options. More attention will be on Aldrige and Lillard. The two are very close defensively both have been locked in this month.

It would be interesting to see Batum as a first or second option.

[ojandpizza]

I would really enjoy seeing these two guys play together. George at the 2 and Batum at the 3.. How exciting would that team be.

[z Revis]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

Batum also has 2 more seasons on George. The bottom line is one is improving each and every game still while the other seems far more polished in his game. This month George has averaged 20, 9, 4 and 2. His potential is very intriguing to me. He still seems like he hasn't fully grown into his body. Still is inconsistent offensively and needs to improve his handles.

[Streaky McFloorburn]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

Batum also has 2 more seasons on George. The bottom line is one is improving each and every game still while the other seems far more polished in his game. This month George has averaged 20, 9, 4 and 2. His potential is very intriguing to me. He still seems like he hasn't fully grown into his body. Still is inconsistent offensively and needs to improve his handles.

It's not really fair to describe Batum as being polished (insinuating he's basically already the player he's going to be, or even necessarily closer to it than George). Remember that even though he's almost a year and a half older and has been in the NBA for 2 more seasons, he probably also needed more of an adjustment period than most players who were born in the U.S. do.

His role has changed drastically from what it was his first 4 seasons, having gone from being mainly a spot-up shooter/defensive specialist to the jack-of-all-trades he is now. Having watched most of the games throughout his career, I can tell you that playmaking ability is a completely new wrinkle that hadn't really been seen at all from him prior to this year, and he's looking to rebound with much more determination (although he did show signs of that last season). His ballhandling is greatly improved but still a work in progress, and he hasn't quite figured out when to drive all the way to the hoop if he doesn't have a completely open path. His off-ball defense is great, but he still has a lot to learn as far as on-ball fundamentals and veteran tricks, because he's been getting by mostly on length and athleticism (which works fine against most small guards or hesitant shooters, but Wes Matthews seems more effective against strong, aggressive wing scorers).

I know (or assume from your profile pic) that you're coming from the perspective of someone who watches the Pacers/George and is familiar with his game and improvements, so I just wanted to give the opposite side of the story. I haven't watched George enough to grade him on anything more than stats/highlights, so that's why it's too hard for me to personally make a fair assessment between them.

If we're being honest, I don't suppose any of us are equally familiar with both players' games, so this thread is going to pretty much be split by intangibles and which team people prefer.

The devil you know vs. the one you don't, or your beautiful baby against that ugly one over there. On paper, the better choice is probably George - but just by a whisker, and no one really knows whether it'll fall out or blossom into a James Harden beard in a couple years. /metaphorbomb

It should be fun to revisit this question down the road though.

[z Revis]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

^ Good post and I think that really ends this discussion for now.

I can definitely admit to not being all that familiar with Batum. I did get to see him last week when the Blazers and Pacers played, but he didn't play all that well that game. His playmaking ability was a pleasant surprise though.

[JazzMan]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

I like Batum's game a lot. Less flash, more substance than PG. But George is a phenomenal player, no doubt about it.

IMO, Batum > George.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

I have to Say George .

[InthePaint]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

more substance than PG.

Please explain "Substance".

[Macar91]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

I love the fact that "Batum Shaka Laka" is liking posts in this thread.

[JazzMan]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

Please explain "Substance".

Paul George isn't as efficient as Batum is.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

Paul George isn't as efficient as Batum is.

IMO I have to see Batum be in PGs current role. Being a third option is different from being a 1st or second.

[JazzMan]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

IMO I have to see Batum be in PGs current role. Being a third option is different from being a 1st or second.

That is a great point. Either way, I think they're both best suited as a 2nd or 3rd option right now. But PG is doing a great job while Granger is out.

[CelticPride]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

What I want to know is why teams go to jumpshots in crunch time rather than run a play or drive and dish or shoot? I saw a Paul George shot at the end of the fourth game winning shot possibility but all the Pacers did was have an ISO for him on the left wing and let him hold it for like 10 seconds which is plenty of time to run a play.

[Streaky McFloorburn]

Re: Nick Batum or Paul George

What I want to know is why teams go to jumpshots in crunch time rather than run a play or drive and dish or shoot? I saw a Paul George shot at the end of the fourth game winning shot possibility but all the Pacers did was have an ISO for him on the left wing and let him hold it for like 10 seconds which is plenty of time to run a play.

It often comes down to trusting what the team does best, if they have multiple elite passers, you're more likely to see them run different plays because they can mitigate the risk of a turnover.

Of course there are all kinds of ways to get different players open in even a couple seconds, but many plays can be much riskier than an isolation, because if the defense covers them properly, there's a larger chance of a turnover or a more tightly contested shot than a star player can create on their own.

If the last possession comes following a timeout, then the defense has already decided what they will take away, who they are willing to double off of, whether or not to switch on screens, etc. - and they are often able to identify the plays that a particular team will run in certain situations.

Considering all of that, the kind of players that can make a move to create space, get their shot off against most defenders, and (hopefully) make the right pass if double teamed, are often the best option when a team wants to make sure they can control the situation even close to as much as the defense does.
(I don't know what the situational data shows, so it's possible this is based on perception, and even the teams with top scorers could try isolation plays less.)

Paul George is the player that best fits that description on his team, at least until (and possibly after) Granger comes back. Because the Pacers are the worst passing team in the league (last in the NBA in AST/TO at 1.303/1), they probably should rely more on isolations in late game situations than any other type of play.