It's an uncomfortable truth, but the Indiana Pacers, winners of four straight, are currently the hottest team in the NBA. With their 105-99 win in Milwaukee, the Pacers overtook their win total from last season and improved to 38-22, keeping them 3 games ahead of the Boston Celtics in the East race for the 3rd seed.

I didn't want to believe it myself, considering how erratic the Pacers have been playing as of late, but right now there is no other team in the league with a four-game win-streak. The Pacers are also the only team in the East and along with San Antonio, the only teams in the league, to have gone 8-2 in their last 10 games.

Does this mean much? Not really. But there are some positive trends emerging during this recent run.

The first is that Danny Granger has well and truly risen up and taken this team by the balls, becoming its unequivocal leader and best player at last. After a really frighteningly bad start to the season, Granger has stepped up, leading the team in scoring on most nights and still hitting big shots when he's not.

Secondly, Roy Hibbert's confidence appears to be back. He went through a slump after the All-Star break but is putting up solid numbers again. He had 23 and 14 in today's win against the Bucks, and sealed the game by hitting 6 consecutive free throws to hold off a late charge. Both George Hill and Darren Collison nearly gave away recent games with poor foul shooting, so it's good to see the big man hold his nerve.

The bench is still not reliable but the insertion of Leandro Barbosa has given it an undeniable boost, especially now that Hill is starting in place of the injured Collison. It's good to have a guy you can count on to score, even though he won't always necessarily deliver. But that feeling is good, at least.

So what now? I only hope the Pacers have not peaked too early. They have a pretty breezy run to finish off the season -- Wolves, @76ers, Bucks, 76ers, Pistons, Bulls. They won't catch up to Miami for the 2nd seed but it makes holding on to the third seed much easier.  

Expected, but it was still a relief. The Pacers are barely holding onto the number 3 seed in the East and they need all the help they can get. Enter the Kyrie Irvingless Cleveland Cavaliers, who are all banged up and relying on D-leaguers to play significant minutes. Two games against these guys should equal two wins, right?

But hang on a sec. These are the Pacers we're talking about. The team that can beat any team and lose to any on any given night.

The Pacers almost lost to the Cavs in game one, falling behind in the fourth and almost giving up a lead late when George Hill (filling in for the injured Darren Collison -- groin) did his best Collison impersonation and missed 3 of 4 free throws in the dying seconds to send the game into overtime. Fortunately, the Pacers held on 104-98 in OT and dodged a bullet.



In game 2, the Pacers headed back to Indiana and took care of business with a convincing 102-83 victory. To be honest, neither win was anything to write home about, but two wins is two wins. The Pacers are now 37-22 and have matched their total wins from last season (which was, by the way, their best since 2005-2006). With 7 games to go in this lockout shortened season, the Pacers have a real good chance of finishing with 41 wins, which would translate to 51 games in an 82-game season. Not bad for last year's 8th seed.

 

Man that was close. After leading for most of the game and 10 points with 1:43 left in the game, the Raptors went nuts from downtown, hitting four 3-pointers, including three in the last 27 seconds. Fortunately, the Pacers kept their composure and George Hill and Paul George finished them off. Final score, 103-98.

The most noteworthy thing to take from this game is that Darren Collison sat out for the first time this season from a groin injury. Starting in his place, George Hill led the team with 18 points (equal team high with Granger), 7 rebounds, 4 assists and a steal in 36 minutes. Granted, this is just one game, but I'm sure it will have fans grumbling about how Hill ought to start over Collison, who hasn't been awful but hasn't been great either.

I'm not so sure though. I'd like to see Vogel test the combinations a little more. Hill is known to be a little erratic himself sometimes, especially when his shot isn't falling. Don't forget, he had zero points against the Celtics last game and he's had a few bagels over the last few weeks. And let's face it, Collison is still a better passer, even though he doesn't necessarily show it on a game-by-game basis. 

Other positives -- Leandro Barbosa's return to Toronto saw him net 14 points on 5-9 shooting to lead the bench, including a few big buckets in the fourth quarter. Amundson continues to do his best Jeff Foster impersonation with 6 points, 5 boards (2 offensive), 2 steals and a block in 15 minutes. Brandon Rush is doing in Golden State what he has always done since his rookie year (ie, 9 points and a few rebounds) but I'm glad not many people are regretting the trade, especially since the Pacers have Hill and Barbosa, both significant upgrades, especially in the mental department.

As I've said for some time now, these old Boston Celtics are a team I wouldn't want the Pacers to face in the first round of the playoffs.

After coming off an impressive win over the Oklahoma City Thunder yesterday, the tired Pacers, playing their fourth game in five nights, were never really in it against the Celtics in a dismal 86-72 loss.  Despite winning the first two in the series against the Celtics this year (when they were kind of in disarray), the Pacers have dropped the last two against them in disappointing fashion. 

Although they are old and injured and missing players, you can never count this Celtics team out because they have their Big Four. This group looks like they are ready for one final run and I wouldn't want the Pacers to face them in the first round, even with home court advantage.

At this stage, I'd much rather the Pacers either lock up the third seed or fifth seed (with home court) and face either the Hawks, the 76ers or the fading Magic (although none of them would be easy) rather than the Celtics. Even if the Pacers scrape through the first round, they would probably face the Bulls if they were the fifth seed or the Heat if they were the second seed, and I don't like their chances in either matchup. That said, if Rose continues to be hampered by injuries, I'd give them a slightly better shot against the Bulls.

Of course, that all depends on whether the Pacers can win their first round matchup, and at the moment, none of their potential opponents look like they'll be a pushover. 

I can't believe I am doing this, and the fact I feel I need to infuriates the hell out of me. But here I am, defending Reggie Miller's induction into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame.

Last year, Miller didn’t just miss out on being a first-ballot Hall of Famer -- he missed out on being on the finalists’ ballot completely. At the time, some said it was fair. Others called it a travesty. He may not be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but he certainly deserves to be on the damn ballot. At the end of the day, however, no one really thought it was that big of a deal, as long as Miller’s name eventually ends up in Springfield.

This year, Miller is headlining the class of inductees, which also includes, amongst others, coach Don Nelson, former NBA champ Jamaal Wilkes and ABA star Mel Daniels. And all of a sudden there are now people who are suggesting he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame at all? Seriously?

If you want to criticize anything, criticize the HOFs selection guidelines, or lack thereof, not the people that get selected because of it. It’s not Miller’s fault that they are letting in so many people most fans have never even heard of.

Inductees are voted in by a small committee based on subjective considerations of merit, meaning whatever they think is relevant. It’s not based on how many championship rings they've won, how many All-NBA First Team selections they've earned or their career Player Efficiency Rating. And while we’re at it, please remember that it’s the Basketball Hall of Fame, not a list of the greatest or most dominant players to have ever played the game.

Miller may not have any championships (neither does Barkley, Ewing, Malone or Stockton), an All-NBA First Team honor (he has three Third Team selections) or a higher career PER (18.4, according to Basketball-Reference.com -- good for 116th in NBA history) to his name, but is he any less deserving than the people that have been selected before him (say Bailey Howell, Maurice Stokes, Adrian Dantley or Chris Mullin)? Is he any less deserving than the people selected for the class of 2012 (a class he is freaking headlining)? The Basketball Hall of Fame needs to be accepted for what it is, not what people think it should be or want it to be.

In any case, let’s take a look at Miller’s basketball career as a whole.

Miller’s raw numbers speak for themselves.

• 11^th overall pick in the 1987 NBA Draft
• 18 seasons for the Indiana Pacers (retiring in 2005)
• 5 All-Star appearances (90, 95, 96, 98, 00)
• 3 All-NBA Third Team selections (95, 96, 98)
• 1 NBA Finals appearance (2000)
• 6 Eastern Conference Finals appearances (94, 95, 98, 99, 00, 04)
• regular season career averages: 18.2 points, 3 rebounds, 3 assists, 1.1 steals and 1.7 turnovers
• regular season career shooting averages: 47.1% FG, 39.5% 3P, 88.8% FT
• playoff career averages: 20.6 points, 2.9 rebounds, 2.5 assists, 1 steal and 1.8 turnovers
• playoff career shooting averages: 44.9% FG, 39% 3P, 89.3% FT

Very good, but not flashy, right? And before I forget, let’s throw in numbers from his college and international careers as well, since it’s the Basketball Hall of Fame, not the NBA Hall of Fame (which doesn’t exist).

• 4 seasons for UCLA (graduating in 1987)
• NIT championship (85), Pac-10 championship (87)
• college averages: 17.2 points, 4.2 rebounds, 2 assists, 54.7% FG, 43.9% 3P, 83.6% FT
• FIBA World Championship (1994) gold medal; All-Tournament Team selection; 17.1 ppg
• Olympic Games (1996) gold medal; 11.4 ppg

These raw numbers and achievements probably won’t blow anyone away, but his career looks a lot more impressive when you start to put them in perspective.

NBA regular season

• 14^th all-time scorer (25,279)
• 2^nd all-time in three-pointers made (2,560; surpassed only by Ray Allen in 2011)
• 9^th all-time in free throw percentage (88.8%); 12^th all-time in free throws made (6,237)
• 3^rd all-time in Offensive Rating (121.48)
• 6^th all-time in True Shooting Percentage (61.39%)
• 7^th all-time in games played (1,389)
• 3^rd all-time in games played with one team (1,389); 2^nd all time in seasons with one team (18; behind John Stockton’s 19)
• 11^th all-time in Win Shares (174.40); 7^th all-time in Offensive Win Shares
• Led the league in free throw percentage 5 times (90-91, 98-99, 00-01, 01-02, 04-05)
• Led the league in three-pointers made 2 times (92-93, 96-97)
• Led the league in True Shooting Percentage 2 times (90-91, 93-94)
• Led the league in Offensive Rating 4 times (90-91, 92-93, 93-94, 98-99)
• Career-high 57 points (@Charlotte in 1992)
• 1 of 5 players in NBA history to have had a 50-40-90 season (ie, to have shot 50% FG, 40% 3P and 90% FT -- others being Larry Bird, Mark Price, Steven Nash and Dirk Nowitzki)

NBA Playoffs

• 20^th all-time scorer (2,972)
• 1^st all-time in three-pointers made (320)
• 9^th all-time in free throw percentage (89.3%); 15^th all-time in free throws made (770)
• 11^th all-time in True Shooting Percentage (60.1%)
• 11^th all-time in Offensive Rating (119.21)
• 19^th all-time in Win Shares (19.9); 8^th all-time in Offensive Win Shares (16.18)
• Career-high 41 points (vs Milwaukee in 2000)

Indiana Pacers

• Franchise leader in games, points, minutes, field goals, three-pointers, free throws, assists and steals
• One of 5 Pacers to have jersey retired (others being Roger Brown, Mel Daniels, Bobby Leonard and George McGinnis)
• First franchise player to start in an All-Star game

UCLA

• 3^rd all-time scorer, 3^rd all-time in field goals made, 3^rd all-time in 3P%, 4^th all-time in FT%, 2^nd all-time in free throws made, 8^th all-time in steals
• 2^nd all-time in single season points (behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar)
• Holds single season records for league points (1986; 500), league scoring average (1986; 27.8), free throws made (1986; 202)
• Holds single game record for free throws in a game (17) and in a half (13), and points in a half (33)

Team USA

• 2^nd leading scorer at 1994 FIBA World Championship (behind Shaquille O’Neal)

Miller’s numbers start to speak a lot louder when you consider the company he is in. While you ordinarily wouldn’t put Miller in the same category as some of the all-time greats because he wasn’t the type of player that regularly dominated the game, some of his numbers and records suggest otherwise. In particular, Miller’s Similarity Score at Basketball-Reference.com, which finds players throughout NBA history with the same career quality and shape, puts him in the same league as guys like Kobe Bryant, John Stockton, Clyde Drexler, Ray Allen, Steve Nash, Jerry West, Jason Kidd and Magic Johnson -- all current or future Hall of Famers.

One of the most common arguments critics use to discredit Miller’s career is that he was “one-dimensional” or that he was a poor defender. I even read a recent article which claimed that all Miller did for 18 seasons was curl off screens. Sorry, but you don’t become the NBA’s 14^th all-time leading scorer by just curling off screens. The Knicks’ Steve Novak is one dimensional. Former Pacer James Posey, in his last season, was one dimensional.

But anyone that has watched Miller play, especially during his prime, will know he had a surprisingly wide offensive repertoire. Defensively, his weight and lateral movement gave him problems against bigger, quicker guards, but his height (6’7”) and length troubled them too. And what do you think chasing Miller around all game did to their stamina?

In any event, being an all-round player or a wonderful defender are not prerequisites for the Hall of Fame. That's like saying Dennis Rodman doesn't deserve to be in it because he is not a great scorer or because Wilt Chamberlain wasn’t a good free throw shooter. If Rodman can get in for being one of the greatest rebounders of all-time, then why can’t Miller get in for being one of the greatest, if not the greatest three-point shooter of all-time?

But to debate whether Miller deserves to get in on his three-point shooting or any other of his records is missing the point entirely. The Hall of Fame should, and does, go far beyond numbers and statistics. Miller’s fame (this is the Hall of Fame, mind you) and the impact he has had on the game of basketball, especially in Indiana, the Hoosier state, puts him right up there with the all-time greats.

Miller was the face of a franchise for almost his entire career. He was Indiana’s best player for more than a decade. How many players in NBA history can say the same thing?

If you ask anyone to name a single player to have played for the Indiana Pacers, even now, chances are they would say Reggie Miller. If you ask any New York Knicks fan which player has tormented their team more than any other, apart from Michael Jordan (and possible Carmelo Anthony -- kidding), chances are they would say Reggie Miller. If you ask who they would want to take a last second three-pointer with their team down by two, Reggie Miller would likely be in the top five, if not number one.

 

If you ask someone to name the most memorable moments in NBA playoff history off the top of their head, chances are they will include Miller’s 25-point fourth quarter against the Knicks in the 1994 playoffs, and if not, certainly his 8 points in 8.9 seconds against the Knicks a year later. And what about his game-winning three-pointer over Michael Jordan in the 98 East finals, or my personal favorite, the 39-foot buzzer-beating bank shot to force the first overtime, and then the two-handed dunk to force the second one against the top-seeded Nets in 2002? How many players outside of Michael Jordan has had so many defining moments in their careers?

I get it if people want to diminish Miller’s achievements because he’s not the type of player traditional fans like. He plays for the small market Pacers. He looks like an alien and is so thin he might slip through the cracks in the floorboards; he flops a lot, likes to talk trash and enjoys playing the villain. And yes, he pushed off Jordan and then danced around in circles like a little girl (and that was because he was playing with a badly sprained ankle, for those who don’t remember). But he also struck fear into the hearts of his opponents like only the greats could.

He was a truly unique player, the kind the NBA might never see again. For that, and the impact his remarkable career had on UCLA, the Indiana Pacers, the NBA, Team USA and the sport of basketball in general -- for more than two decades -- no one should question Reggie Miller’s rightful inclusion in the Hall of Fame ever again.