This team is a better version of the 2013 Pacers

[Moranis]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I love Tatum, but what's with folks saying he's ALREADY at or even better than the likes of George and Hayward? Really??!?!

Boy people on here and in the media really underrate George and Hayward. Not saying they are transcendental superstars, but they are still proven all-stars who can consistently score 22-24 PPG and are pretty good at defense too. Lets cool it down a bit, okay?

Be clear on my comparison. I was saying Tatum is comparable (not better) to a 2012-2013 Paul George, who was in his 3rd year.

[KGBirdBias]

Disclaimer: I'm not saying we have MJ or Pippen. Now that's out the way.

In 1991, I distinctly remember the Baby Bulls taking out the Lakers and I thought...that's it for this Laker run. They looked old and MJ, Pippen and Grant looked faster and more athletic. It wasn't that Magic and them played bad but the looks on their faces was..."who are these guys and I've never seen anything like this". This is what I need to see happen in this Cavs\Celtics series. At some point something shocking has to happen for Bron to lose and I think this is the year.

I watched the opening season game last night and the Celtics blew 3 possessions towards the end of the game. We did have Kyrie though. Everyone's game has matured since that time though.

[gouki88]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Terrible take man. George Hill had a very average offensive game, and was both a worse rebounder and passer than Rozier has been in the playoffs. It's not even close

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Even allowing for pace, during the playoffs

George Hill averaged 15, 4, and 4 with 1 steal on 40%, 36%, and 83% shooting splits.
Terry Rozier averaged 18, 6, and 6 with 1 steal on 42%, 40%, and 83% shooting splits.

When Hill was on the floor in those playoffs, the Pacers had a 111 offensive rating and 106 defensive rating.

When Rozier was on the floor in these playoffs, the Cs have a 122 offensive rating and 108 defensive rating.

The eye test has told me he is far more dynamic of a player than Hill every was, and the stats show that he is better and more efficient, even allowing for pace.

[celticsclay]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Terrible take man. George Hill had a very average offensive game, and was both a worse rebounder and passer than Rozier has been in the playoffs. It's not even close

Funny to see more pacers comparisons. In one thread we got a guy saying their miller, smits, davis, mullin, Davis, rose, team that pushed Jordan's squad 7 games was worse than this years 8 seed. Here their 2013 seed was the stuff of legends.

[gouki88]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Terrible take man. George Hill had a very average offensive game, and was both a worse rebounder and passer than Rozier has been in the playoffs. It's not even close

Funny to see more pacers comparisons. In one thread we got a guy saying their miller, smits, davis, mullin, Davis, rose, team that pushed Jordan's squad 7 games was worse than this years 8 seed. Here their 2013 seed was the stuff of legends.

Rofl. What do those Hall of Famers and All-Stars have on the mighty 2013 Pacer squad

[PhoSita]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Better than Rozier based on what? It's hard to support that argument with more than conclusory statements.

[hpantazo]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

This Celtics team is easily better than the 2013 Pacers. Easily.

[Bucketgetter]

I cringe at the Jaylen-Lance comp.
Mental makeup is sooooo important.

Why? I would love to have Lance's mind in Jaylen's body for this series. Lebron would retire.

[Moranis]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Even allowing for pace, during the playoffs

George Hill averaged 15, 4, and 4 with 1 steal on 40%, 36%, and 83% shooting splits.
Terry Rozier averaged 18, 6, and 6 with 1 steal on 42%, 40%, and 83% shooting splits.

When Hill was on the floor in those playoffs, the Pacers had a 111 offensive rating and 106 defensive rating.

When Rozier was on the floor in these playoffs, the Cs have a 122 offensive rating and 108 defensive rating.

The eye test has told me he is far more dynamic of a player than Hill every was, and the stats show that he is better and more efficient, even allowing for pace.

Sure and the Pacers ran their offense through Paul George, got the ball to Hibbert and West in the paint, etc.  Hill was the 4th option on offense that year, Rozier is a very close 2nd to Tatum.  Very difficult to compare stats between players with vastly different roles and vastly different team makeups.  Hill was 26 and in his 5th year of significant playing time.  Rozier is 23 in his 3rd year and it wasn't till this year that even started a game.  I suspect Rozier will end up with both a higher peak and a better overall career than Hill, but he isn't there yet and isn't as good as Hill was in Indiana. 

[Moranis]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Terrible take man. George Hill had a very average offensive game, and was both a worse rebounder and passer than Rozier has been in the playoffs. It's not even close

Funny to see more pacers comparisons. In one thread we got a guy saying their miller, smits, davis, mullin, Davis, rose, team that pushed Jordan's squad 7 games was worse than this years 8 seed. Here their 2013 seed was the stuff of legends.

Ah yes because I think 2013 George Hill is better than 2018 Terry Rozier, it must mean that 2013 Pacers squad is the stuff of legends.  Love that logic.

And yes I'd absolutely take a healthy Wall, Beal, Porter, Gortat, Morris over that Pacers squad.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Even allowing for pace, during the playoffs

George Hill averaged 15, 4, and 4 with 1 steal on 40%, 36%, and 83% shooting splits.
Terry Rozier averaged 18, 6, and 6 with 1 steal on 42%, 40%, and 83% shooting splits.

When Hill was on the floor in those playoffs, the Pacers had a 111 offensive rating and 106 defensive rating.

When Rozier was on the floor in these playoffs, the Cs have a 122 offensive rating and 108 defensive rating.

The eye test has told me he is far more dynamic of a player than Hill every was, and the stats show that he is better and more efficient, even allowing for pace.

Sure and the Pacers ran their offense through Paul George, got the ball to Hibbert and West in the paint, etc.  Hill was the 4th option on offense that year, Rozier is a very close 2nd to Tatum.  Very difficult to compare stats between players with vastly different roles and vastly different team makeups.  Hill was 26 and in his 5th year of significant playing time.  Rozier is 23 in his 3rd year and it wasn't till this year that even started a game.  I suspect Rozier will end up with both a higher peak and a better overall career than Hill, but he isn't there yet and isn't as good as Hill was in Indiana.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. The stats speak for themselves. I'd say Hill was maybe a bit more comfortable in his role, but it's pretty tough to say he was "clearly" better than Rozier. At best you could say they are comparable, but looking at the stats and considering how dymanic Rozier has been, I'd say Rozier has been better.

Rozier may actually be lower than the 4th option on the Cs. He might bring the ball up the court, but Tatum, Brown, Smart, and Morris all have higher usage rates than him. And the ball flows through Horford's hands primarily as a facilitator. Based on that, he is anywhere from the 3-6 option.

[Roy H.]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Even allowing for pace, during the playoffs

George Hill averaged 15, 4, and 4 with 1 steal on 40%, 36%, and 83% shooting splits.
Terry Rozier averaged 18, 6, and 6 with 1 steal on 42%, 40%, and 83% shooting splits.

When Hill was on the floor in those playoffs, the Pacers had a 111 offensive rating and 106 defensive rating.

When Rozier was on the floor in these playoffs, the Cs have a 122 offensive rating and 108 defensive rating.

The eye test has told me he is far more dynamic of a player than Hill every was, and the stats show that he is better and more efficient, even allowing for pace.

One thing to consider: the Celtics’ stats used are through two rounds, while the Pacers are through three. To compare apples here, you’d want to look at the Pacers stats after the NYK series.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Since when is Rozier better than Hill.  That is just nonsense. And Tatum = George. More nonsense

Rozier has been statistically better than Hill that year.

And Tatum has been statistically comparable to George

they aren't better though. The Pacers played at a very slow pace. They scored less 95 ppg on the season (their differential was +4).  The C's this year scored 10 ppg more with a similar +4 differential.  Just a completely different style of play leading to vastly different stats.  George Hill was better than Rozier on  both ends of the floor.

Even allowing for pace, during the playoffs

George Hill averaged 15, 4, and 4 with 1 steal on 40%, 36%, and 83% shooting splits.
Terry Rozier averaged 18, 6, and 6 with 1 steal on 42%, 40%, and 83% shooting splits.

When Hill was on the floor in those playoffs, the Pacers had a 111 offensive rating and 106 defensive rating.

When Rozier was on the floor in these playoffs, the Cs have a 122 offensive rating and 108 defensive rating.

The eye test has told me he is far more dynamic of a player than Hill every was, and the stats show that he is better and more efficient, even allowing for pace.

One thing to consider: the Celtics’ stats used are through two rounds, while the Pacers are through three. To compare apples here, you’d want to look at the Pacers stats after the NYK series.

You'd also have to compare the competition to make it fair.

Horford-Korver-Smith-Teague-Harris < Giannis-Middleton-Bledsoe-Snell-Henson

Melo-Chandler-Felton-Smith-Shumpert < Simmons-Emiid-Saric-Covington-Reddick

Things are never a direct comparison. There are just too many variables.

However, the teams are comparable.