For Paul George, It's All Cooking Shows And Basketball

by Tom Lewis on Sep 8, 2010 10:32 PM EDT in Indiana Pacers News

Rookie Paul George has a ways to go before he makes a big impact on the court for the Indiana Pacers, but the journey has begun.

George's latest blog post at Pacers.com reveals the young fella is settled down with a new place near the Fieldhouse and spends most of his days on the grind with teammates preparing for his first NBA training camp. When he isn't putting in reps at the Fieldhouse, he apparently enjoys watching the cooking channels in his new pad. I must say, it is hard to pass up a good episode of Cupcake Wars or Diners, Drive-In & Dives.

On the court, it sounds like George has spent the past several weeks working on deficiencies in his game exposed by the hard lessons learned during summer league.

I'm trying to condition my body and get ready mentally for what we've got to go through in training camp. It's good that I've been here because the veterans already know what to do so it's important to stay in the same loop, on the same page, as them. And it's a good chance to get a lot of reps leading up to camp.

I'm starting to feel more comfortable with what coach (Jim O'Brien) wants me to do and how to really take care of the ball. I feel like I'm a totally different player from the beginning of summer league to now. It's just continuing the repetitions, starting to feel more comfortable, starting to be able to read plays and be able to create.

The unflappable, positive spirit of the 20-year-old rookie continues to shine through. Sure won't be hard to cheer for any success this kid shows on the floor this year.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I really like George.

It’d be just great if he could WIN the starting SG spot coming out of camp and make a strong case for rookie of the year.

by infinityzero.systemerror on Sep 8, 2010 11:27 PM EDT reply actions

i couldnt agree more

I think if he could win that job then the pacers will be looking very good for the future. I think the more minutes he could earn the better the future looks for the Pacers.

by supercolts on Sep 8, 2010 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions

George is not a 2

I’ll be stunned if he ever is. I mean it. He’s never been a guard in his entire life. His dribble is sloppy and far too high, he’s completely right hand dominant, he has no clue what to do with the ball once he puts it on the floor but try and score. On the other end he can handle a lot of 2s, he’s quick enough laterally, he’s super active with his arms and hands and clearly has the length. He can guard them, but he’ll never be one, at least in the traditional sense, on offense.

If he shows enough promise this coming year I’m more than open to moving Danny assuming he has a healthy year, for the right package of course, not just move him to move him. I said it. Danny’ll be 28 at the tail end of next season. We’re clearly (finally) in a full on youth movement, I think a sign an traded Horford for Danny is a deal I’d pursue.

٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶ The sky is falling!

by IndyPacers on Sep 9, 2010 1:43 AM EDT reply actions

Hmm...

I’m gonna say he can improve his dribbling and his decision-making with hard work. Plus, you can work to become ambidextrous. He’s 20, plenty of time for him to improve. Although, I agree he is more of a 3 than a 2, it’s just where he would fit into a starting lineup on this team at this point in time.

by infinityzero.systemerror on Sep 9, 2010 2:54 AM EDT up reply actions

Hold on

Rush is an awful ball handler and a horrible a non-existent decision maker yet no one says he should be playing SF. Reggie Miller himself was a poor ball handler and barely an average defender, yet he did a few things so well (shooting, intangibles) the other stuff just didn’t matter. Is Paul George the next Reggie Miller? Probably not. But I do think it’s awfully early to pigeon hole a 20-year old kid with an intriguing array of skills into only one role/position at this point.

by Hinrich10 on Sep 9, 2010 10:10 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

not so fast

we dont know what george is at all right now, and there is a good chance that he’ll never be as good as Danny is right now or the near future, so, i’m so sick of hearing people wanting to replace the 3 spot with george, that’s ridiculous! look i’m hoping that george turns into a great player, and if he turns into a really good 3 then we can play danny at the 2.
now to respond to your propose trade, why should we give up anything for horford right now when there all many free agent power forwrds on the market next season including Horford? But, my main point is lets see what we have first this season, lets see what collison is, lets see how much Hibbert has improve or can improve, lets see what george is, I think there is just as many uncertainties on this team than last year.

by latrell spreewel on Sep 9, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't believe he said to trade danny.

He merely said he would be more open to the idea of moving him and only for the right price. I understand what he was saying and I would agree that I’d be more open to trading Danny if George impresses. Oh, he mentioned that too. Read his comment man.

by infinityzero.systemerror on Sep 10, 2010 1:27 AM EDT up reply actions

that is a big if

why would you be open to trade your best player when there is so much hope going into the season, isn’t it possible with all our expiring contracts to improve the team without moving your best player?

by latrell spreewel on Sep 11, 2010 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions

Well the idea would be that George would be as good or better.

Then as a result you could trade Danny for a high price. Just saying I’d be more open to the idea, but it would take a lot to get me interested in trading him still. Plus, I’m doubting that the expiring contracts are very valuable at this point. Something could, and probably will, change between now and the trade deadline, but even then I still kinda feel we won’t be able to get much for them. Ford is probably the most valuable and he may not even play that much, if at all, and he didn’t exactly go out last year on a high note. So, I’m thinking that the value is pretty low, at this time. Danny would offer more value and would be more expendable with a breakout from George. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying trade him, I like Danny a lot. Just saying that if someone offered a nice young big man and a 1st rounder, I would feel compelled to listen.

by infinityzero.systemerror on Sep 11, 2010 3:58 AM EDT up reply actions

that's my point

even if we end up keeping the dunleavys and the fords of the world, their contracts would run out this season, and we solidify the front lines with signing, and there are quite a few interesting players available on the market after next season, so why just give up someone like Danny, especially with the money and the prodution he gives you. What makes you think george will be as good or better than Danny when he hasn’t played a single game yet? those are certainly big shoes to fit!
By the way my original point was that if george turns into a star, we can try Danny at the 2, after all, he plays more like a two anyways with all the threes he shoots.

by latrell spreewel on Sep 11, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions

That's why I'm saying after he proves he could fit those shoes.

All of this is based on the idea that George has shown he is going to be as good, if not better than Granger after a season of play. I’m hardly saying trade him on the possibility now. Danny at the 2 might work offensively, but he might have trouble defensively dealing with the faster,smaller guards. But then again maybe his size makes up the difference. If I had to say anything, Danny’s size and strength make him a better choice to play the forward given the other options on the team at this time. All the other options on the team are smaller and weaker than him.

by infinityzero.systemerror on Sep 11, 2010 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions