Paul George ceiling
I have been reading things on forum about Paul George being a TMac-lite. I can tell that they are both athletic, ultra long and around the same height, but I wonder if George really have that high of potential?
I have only watched a handful of his games during the playoff vs Bulls and I see the kid can play some good D, can the Pacers fans shed some lights on how high they think Paul George potential would be?
Paul George is no where near TMac's level of talent. TMac was a freakish athlete at 6'8-6'9, and his ball handling was that of a PG, which is something Paul George needs to work on. George struggles to create his own shot right now, unlike TMac at the same age.
At best, I see George as being a 3rd option on a playoff team. His peak would probably be around 16PPG. I just don't see him ever being a dynamic scorer, he didn't show it with Fresno St, and he hasnt shown flashes of it his rookie year.
He has the most potential of any Pacer and his size at his position is huge. He could be in the Carmelo-range at best
At best, I see Paul George as a lesser version of Rudy Gay.
I should know this but, Who is the fat former college basketball player/child molester pedophile that is commonly made fun of? He hasn't been mentioned as often lately so I have forgotten his name
If he can get to 18 and 6 with his defense he might be as good. George is going to be an elite defender
talking about "ceiling" he has a super high one...
in '10 class there is Wall and i don't even know if Derrick or DeMarcus have higher ceilings
if he works Kobe-like hard he really could be close to T-Mac..the tallest but still one of the most athletic sg's with great range defense and even passing..
but realistically i think he has the same average motor problem like Gay and not only i see George as a very similar player but i see him having so so similar career..
however it's still very good for #10 pick
naww his athlitisim is like T-macs...George is pretty athletic but ya his handles arent that polished....t-mac also had a nice passing game..but prehaps george can turn out to be a better defender....probobly a rudy gay type player when its all said and done
once said he was kobe like without seeing him play once.
I don't remember T-Mac showcasing point guard handles during his first couple of seasons in Toronto. I don't remember him being a dynamic offensive player either. I remember a tall, long and athletic wing who could make plays defensively and finish in transition. I remember a player who played without the ball most of the time and was doing a lot of the dirty work, while VC shined.
We didn't really see just how talented and dynamic McGrady was as an offensive player until he landed in Orlando. People were shocked when he started doing what he was doing that first season in Orlando... Nobody knew he had THAT kind of offensive talent.
I see a lot of those same similarities in George. He played without the ball his first season and did a lot of the dirty work. Using his athleticism and length to defend three positions. Getting out and transition and finishing. Showing a nice stroke with range.
With hard work and timing/opportunity, I could see George making a similar leap. Maybe not as good as T-Mac was, but pretty damn good.
I don't really see the Gay comparisons. George already defends better and doesn't need the ball in his hands like that. George is more active in my opinion. He's all over the floor.
George is at best a 16 point guy in his prime, with 3 dimes and around 5 boards, and a nice three pint shooter. He is NOT a star, and is going to be a third option at best. He played good for a rookie, but still has so much more work to do on his game. I do think he will be a solid role player off the bench, but nothing more than a third option.
He may not have gotten to show his handles, but they were there unlike George. Even T-Mac's draft night profile stated that one of his strength's was advanced ballhandling at his size.
George is an NBA player... That means his job is to play basketball. For that reason, I think it's safe to say that he'll improve his ball handling and one on one isolation situations. I mean, it's not like he's a poor ball handler. He's adequate.
Will he ever be as dynamic as T-Mac was? I doubt that. Not many in NBA HISTORY are THAT dynamic with the ball. I mean, T-Mac had a crazy crossover, first step, hesitations, change of speed/direction and had crazy balance off of the dribble on his pull up. Could finish easily with either hand. Not to mention he could see the floor and was a great passer. Tough to reach that level.
However, with HARD work, George can make a great leap. The physical tools are there. He's 6' 9" in shoes. He's not a freak athlete, but he's an elite level one. He has very good balance and a great looking jumpshot. He anticipates well and has a very good feel for the game. It seems that ball handling is what's holding him back. I see no reason why he won't bust his ass since this will probably be what's between him and stardom.
I say just wait and see.
Based on summer reports, ball handling, one on one isolation moves, jabs, ball fakes, etc are what he's been working on.
I promise that T-Mac's package didn't include all of those things when he was in Toronto. T-Mac put in work. He took his God given physical gifts and put in work. IF George does that, then I see no reason why he can't take his game up notches that nobody thought he could.
Everything he got was either at the rim or from behind the arc (and he was awful from behind there), so it is really unfair to compare him to Melo and Rudy when so much of their game comes from their mid-range game.
Not saying he couldnt Indiana, Simply that I see a guy somewhat closer to Trevor Ariza in Houston with slightly better shot creating ability. Not a star or someone to build a franchise around, but definitely a good player no less who could make an All-Star game with the right team/role.
True. He's basically a layup/dunk or three right now. He either doesn't have a mid-range game right now or just isn't comfortable going to it.
He'll have to put in a ton of work and based on reports, he's more than willing to do that.
I'll be one sad Pacers fan if the best he gets is Trevor Ariza lol.
He's reportedly doing 3 a days everyday, he seems determined to be great.
TMac did have advance ball handling coming out of high school, infact, one of the many comparison he was drawing was Penny Hardaway, who ironically the exact player TMac patterned his game after (he idolized Penny and the reason he wears #1 and probably signed with Orlando to follow his footsteps). TMac didn't get to showcase it during Toronto years, because he was playing with a star wingplayer Vince Carter, and he did not get any minutes his rookie year, due to the fact that he wasn't ready physically/mentally being an 18year old rookie.
One thing that tends to get overlooked by production-orientated draftheads is work-ethic.
I'm a big fan of Paul George and before we look at his all-star potential, you have to consider just how useful a player like him could be. He's already a willing defender, with the tools to guard four different positions. He gets a ton of deflections, steals and blocks which leads to fast-break opportunities and on top of that, he's a tough rebounder. He's a bit raw on the offensive end, but as of now, he has a very defined role in the offense (transition player/perimeter shooter) and good overall awareness.
The willingness to be a role-player isn't common in young athletes like George. Some people believe he's doing himself an injustice by "settling" as a player, but I don't see it that way. Instead, I see him as a player who has the ability to adapt, as he was a different kind of player at Fresno State. This unique skill will almost certainly assure that George will see a lot of playing time (and success) in the coming years, regardless of the players he has around him.
George looks like a future all-star to me, and I'm fully aware that his ball-handling ability is not yet defined, his shot is inconsistent and his moves in the half-court offense are limited. Like Tezo mentioned, all of that is subject to change. His ball-handling ability was actually considered a strength coming into the draft. In pre-draft workouts he looked remarkably comfortable with the ball in his hands, and he was even counted on to create some of his own offense at school. Does that make him T-Mac? No, but it does count for something potential-wise. Watching him play (even in only his rookie season) really gives you the impression that he is going to get a lot better in this area.
I usually don't like predicting stats, but George could be a 20 PPG scorer in a few seasons. That alone should put him in all-star consideration, providing his team is at least somewhat competitive.
I didn't see much of T-Mac in high school. I didn't know much about him until I saw him in Toronto. I saw nothing that told me he'd be the player he became in Orlando.
When he suited up for Orlando, I couldn't believe my eyes. I mean, I knew he was physically gifted, but just didn't know he could do all of that.
Yea TMac had that laid-back personality, I think everyone was surprised that he had the mentality to be a 30PPG scorer. He was suppose to be the "Pippen" for VCarter, and the same when he came to Orlando, he was suppose to be GHill's "Pippen", but he transformed into a dynamic/aggressive scorer.
Again, not saying that george CAN"T be a 20ppg scorer, because with enough shot attempts most can, but what I am sayng is that he more than likely won't on a winner. Again, I could be wrong as he may have a career similar to Richard Jefferson scoring wise, just that with his willingness to be a role player, I see more Trevor Ariza. Before everyone goes onto say that's a bad thing, I personally think it's quite a compliment. The year Ariza won a title with LAL he was on his way to being a 15-16 ppg scorer, 6 rebounds, and a few assists while being known as the premier defender for the LakeShow while being close to that All-Star by association level. The next year he came out and showed some skills we hadn't seen yet but unfortunately fell in love with a 3 ball that never came back otherwise he was primed for a breakout.
Somewhere between Ariza and Gay is where I'd see him. Not quite the shot creator or athlete of Gay, though better than Ariza. Probably actually a better defender than both though. As long as he keeps working hard and dorsn't become a whiny ass like Danny G he may very well become what you all have hopes of him becoming, but in this L of talent and athleticism, I'm not holding my breathe. Good player possible All-Star once MAYBE twice, but not someone you stop trades for proven talent for.
With more thought, the guy he reminds me of somewhat with better defensive versatility is Eddie Jones.
with his potential as a rookie for the Pacers. I guess I see him as a more athletic (post O'Brien)Danny Granger. He may not ever be the volume three point shooter that Granger was the past couple of years. That may be a good thing. His quickness, finishing ability, and defense are ahead of Granger. His main weaknesses right now are ball handling and shot selection. You can say the same thing about almost any young player in the NBA. I also think he needs an in-between game of post/turnarounds and mid-range jumpers. It is diffucult to predict an All-Star game for him at this point, because of the Bron/Melo lockdown at the 3 in the East. His talent says he will make one or more eventually.