George Hill: Should He Start Alongside Darren Collison for Indiana Pacers?

In cooking using one ingredient when the recipe calls for another doesn’t always work. Adding sugar instead of salt doesn’t improve your steak, you can’t make margaritas with vodka and Indiana acquiring the Spurs’ George Hill won't mask the team's need for a true 2-guard.

Owning an NBA team is like a restaurant, the GM is, well, the general manager. The coach is the executive chef and the roster is the ingredients.

Just like the vast majority of Michelin rated restaurants, the best teams reside in the cosmopolitan cities. Owners there have the largest TV markets, the most money and the allure. In the revitalized age of superstars, the top players are forming mega-teams. Just as with food, L.A., Chicago, Boston, Miami and New York are sought after destinations turning out the best products. They are the hot cities and teams.

With limited funds and little sex appeal, small market teams can’t steal away the premier cooks nor the top players. If teams like Cleveland get lucky and land one in the draft, it’s only a matter of time before they move on for greater fame.

Small cities are essentially becoming glorified internships (unless it's Sacramento in which case it's just an internship—sorry NoCal) for the players before they take their talents to greener ($$) pastures and the brighter lights. 

Therefore if small market teams like the Indiana Pacers want to stay competitive, they have to go back to the basics by building well-rounded complete teams. It starts with the ingredients.

Innovative flare is nice, but when it comes down to it, the best ingredients are what always win out (see Dallas vs. Miami). If you are lacking the exotic spices though, you have to put the meal together just right. Team basketball is still the ultimate trump. You can’t skimp on ingredients or role players who fill a need. 

Since busting up the team after the debacle in Auburn Palace the Pacers have been trying different combinations of flavors hoping to come up with a winning formula. Throwing pieces together—be it veteran journeymen (Troy Murphy), overpriced free agent talent (looking at you T.J. Ford) or over-hyped rookies with little more than to their game than potential (Shawne Williams), just wasn’t working. The Pacers were dry, cold and far too bland.

Finally, GM Larry Bird got back to the basics. Starting with the drafting of Danny Granger and then a few years later Roy Hibbert and last summer's trade for Darren Collison, the Pacers began building a nice core group that with one or two extra pieces could be really good.

Think of Indy as a enticing bacon cheese burger.  

Paul George—who is expected to have a breakout year—is the meat, Hibbert the bacon and Collison the sharp Wisconsin cheddar. All are young and talented. Sounds like the start of a pretty good one right?

Then the Pacers add Hansbrough, make him the toasted Sourdough bread (the glue which holds a burger together), and still have All-Star Danny Granger. As trade bait, he is versatile. He can either be the grilled onions or the light aioli spread (the finishing touches) or be used as a trade piece to round out the roster.

Now we are really on to something. It’s not a fillet or a pan seared pistachio encrusted Mahi-Mahi but a good solid burger is always a winner and it will bring people back (reference to a flagging but suddenly re-energized fan base).

But like all good burgers you need something more. It's not completely satisfying by itself. You need fries (a double-double power forward) and a nice cold brew to wash it down with (a shooting guard that can take you over the top when you need it most and put away a team).

George Hill does not fill either one of those roles and as of yet Indiana is still missing both.

We know the Pacers are in the market for a double-double guy so they get a pass on that for now, but instead of going to a local microbrewery and rounding out the meal, Larry Bird added extra cheese. Only it wasn’t another slice of cheddar. Think of Hill more like blue cheese.

By bringing in former IUPUI star George Hill, the Pacers traded for a guy who clashes with Darren Collison’s style and is more-natural fit for the same position than the off-guard spot which he finds himself suddenly slotted. 

It’s almost borderline awkward. How unwanted do you think Collison felt watching the draft unfold?

Nothing against Hill, but at 6’2" and averaging only about 12 points a game, he’s not the take- over-the-game-scorer the Pacers need and if they move him off ball his height becomes a liability. Plus while he has worked on and improved his shot a great deal over the past year, he still isn't a lights- shooter. I want him to be too, but he's not. A .377 average from deep puts him fourth on the team from three. Unfortunately we don't have three guys named Reggie ahead of him.  

So now what?

Many people think that a Collison-Hill backcourt can work. For the Pacers sake, hopefully they are right. Maybe they'll work well after all and chef Vogel can blend the flavors for surprisingly savory results.

But questions remain. If they do start, then what happens with Granger and Paul George, who was supposed to assume a larger role? What minutes will Vogel find Stephenson? Do Rush/Dunleavy/Jones have spots on the team or are they out the door? If so can we rebuild the chemistry that was crucial to the late season surge? 

Ultimately, two options remain. One the Pacers can change their style and play in waves. A Collison, George, Granger, power forward X (yet to be acquired) and Hibbert is a tough, big and disciplined starting five. Coach Vogel could then sub them out with a much quicker and athletic Hill, Stephenson, Granger/George, Hansbrough and Foster lineup which could create havoc and wear teams out.

Only thing is, is that the Houston Rockets—with their 3482 person deep bench—tried that with limited success last year. Switching styles and playing in waves is very hard to manage because it's sacrifices continuity and cuts into players minutes. 

The other alternative is the Pacers can stick with a small guard lineup, use the bench as trade pieces and keep the lineup relatively stable. Problem with that is that small-guard lineups seldom work. Stephen Curry and Monta Ellis struggled in Golden State last year in the most high profile and recent attempt. Indiana might have better luck because Collison is a more true point guard while Hill is comfortable working off the ball, but it's pushing your luck.

Plus Collison or Hill are both too good to come off the bench and our bench is already deep. So the last option is for the Pacers to use Hill or Collison as trade bait. While I believe a trade is best (I’d personally like to keep Collison), Bird seems keen on Hill and keeping both. Rumor has it he's been vying for Hill for some time. 

In the end Indiana fans should come hungry but expect for a few odd combinations of flavors as the Pacers are still working out the the menu. Until they figure out which direction they are headed, it hould make for a fun, albeit possibly disappointing, result. Let's hope it doesn't leave the fans with another bad taste in their mouths because its time for a winning product.