PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Do the Simons want to win an NBA Championship



Bball
01-17-2006, 08:10 PM
Let me frame the question. I ask: "DO the Simons want to win an NBA Championship?" -not- "Would they like to win one?"

Of course they would -like- to win one but that is beside the point. For years we've been told what wonderful owners we have and how 'hands off' they are. Is that a sign they believe it's best to get out of the way, or is it that they really don't care about basketball and championships that much?

Is it 'just a business to them'? Nothing wrong with that but let's put the cards on the table. The Simons get (IMHO) kid glove treatment because they saved this franshise from moving or folding.

Is Walsh hamstrung by the Simons' desires to merely keep the seats filled and never field a loser because to go for a championship has a higher risk potential in that business model? ....Or are Walsh and the Simons a perfect match?

...and we're just suckers strung along for the ride...???

Ragnar
01-17-2006, 08:16 PM
Why would they be spending as much on Payroll and most likely losing money if they did not want to win. I am sure every team has a line they have to draw on spending. Even the Mavs had to.

SoupIsGood
01-17-2006, 08:17 PM
Why would they have fought so hard to try and get Ron back last year

Unclebuck
01-17-2006, 08:21 PM
oops sorry

Unclebuck
01-17-2006, 08:28 PM
Yes they want to win

Bball
01-17-2006, 08:42 PM
Why would they have fought so hard to try and get Ron back last year


Because the fans wanted Ron back? Ron was good for TV ratings?

And tell me, how hard did they fight?

-Bball

Roaming Gnome
01-17-2006, 09:04 PM
Yes, they are trying to win it all. I don't have any proof or any reason to believe that they are just wanting to turn a profit. Anyway, if that were the case, I'm sure we wouldn't have as high of payroll as we do.

Pacersfan.
01-17-2006, 09:19 PM
Because the fans wanted Ron back? Ron was good for TV ratings?

And tell me, how hard did they fight?

-Bball

Well, they fought hard enough to strain their relationship with Stern.

SoupIsGood
01-17-2006, 09:57 PM
Because the fans wanted Ron back? Ron was good for TV ratings?

And tell me, how hard did they fight?

-Bball


You're veering into ridiculous.

Los Angeles
01-17-2006, 09:58 PM
I'm surprised at how emotional my reaction to this thread is.

The Simons are virtual saints of Indy. If it weren't for them and business people like them, Indy could have ended up as nothing more than Gary, Indiana's bigger brother.

I think it's ridiculous and insulting to suggest that they don't want to win an NBA championship.

I also think it's ridiculous and insulting to suggest that they have not taken risks. The biggest risk imaginable was banking on the economy of the city of Indianapolis in the first place. The first thing any smart business person would have done after aquiring the Pacers franchise is move the team to more fertile soil.

They risked it all, and continue to take risks, and the city is better for it.

indygeezer
01-17-2006, 10:07 PM
A time long long ago, back when I had my season Tix at MSA, I sat about 10-12 seats to the right of the Simon Bros. I've seen Herb's face so red you could light a DW cig off of it, and I've seen Mel so giddy happy he'd pass for a drunken sailor.
They care...the care very much...or at least they did.

(Oh and those were reg season games, we didn't make the PO's back then)

Kstat
01-17-2006, 10:11 PM
Take a look at Indiana's payroll and please tell me with a straight face that the Simons don't want to win.

Bball
01-17-2006, 10:23 PM
Well, they fought hard enough to strain their relationship with Stern.

Stern strained that relationship all on his own (with some help from Ron Artest). I've not seen any reports that Stern is angry with Herb (or Mel)... I have seen the opposite (and it was Stern who said it).

The rift there was created by Stern's handling of 11/19.... not anything that the Pacers hierarchy did. ...Or we've surely not been privy to it if it happened.

-Bball

Bball
01-17-2006, 10:31 PM
Take a look at Indiana's payroll and please tell me with a straight face that the Simons don't want to win.

All the payroll tells me is that Walsh's M.O. of building teams capable of winning in the regular season and making the playoffs works for them at our payroll.

I never argued that they wanted to lose and wanted no part of a high salary. Walsh has shown us that you can pay a high salary and keep your own players and put a regular season winner on the court.... and the city will support him and the team.

What's yet to be seen is TPTB risking that playoff making regular season juggernaut to rock the boat and try and put the team over the top. Walsh has already told us he isn't going to do it. He doesn't think Indy would support the team (if they weren't winning games and headed to the playoffs).

Maybe the Simons agree?

-Bball

Kstat
01-17-2006, 10:37 PM
BBall, you're completely off-base.

An owner shows commitment to winning with his checkbook.

The Simons aren't responsible for making basketball-related decisions. They can only support the people that do.

Bball
01-17-2006, 10:39 PM
I think it's ridiculous and insulting to suggest that they don't want to win an NBA championship.


Two things....
I'm sure they want to win a championship. The question is whether they want one bad enough to actually see it be a real possibility.

If insulting them helps to shake things up and change the M.O. of this stagnant organization then I'm fine with it.

Note to Indystar reporters: I wouldn't mind hearing from the Simons about basketball from time to time. I'd like to know they care.... too...
I'd like to know this season, and last bothers them as much (if not more than) the fans. I'd like to know whether the lack of a championship is burning a hole in their soul or more like losing a minor retailer in the mall (disappointing but there are bigger fish to fry).


-Bball

Kstat
01-17-2006, 10:44 PM
Two things....
I'm sure they want to win a championship. The question is whether they want one bad enough to actually see it be a real possibility.

If insulting them helps to shake things up and change the M.O. of this stagnant organization then I'm fine with it.

Note to Indystar reporters: I wouldn't mind hearing from the Simons about basketball from time to time. I'd like to know they care.... too...
I'd like to know this season, and last bothers them as much (if not more than) the fans. I'd like to know whether the lack of a championship is burning a hole in their soul or more like losing a minor retailer in the mall (disappointing but there are bigger fish to fry).


-Bball

1. I hear From Bill Davidson maybe once every 3-4 years. Doesn't mean I think he doesn't care about winning. I could really care less how many public appearances he makes. It's not his job. He isn't the face of the team. BIll Davidson showed me commitment with his pocketbook.

2. Insulting your owner doesnt do any good, unless you want him to sell the team. Good luck finding someone else who will have such a strong commitment to Indiana.

3. They SImons don't owe it to you to tell you how they feel. It's their team. They've shown a commitment to put a winning team on the court. Their GM has made some very poor decisions with their money.

I find it amazing that you hang this on the Simons but not Donnie Walsh.

How are the Simons supposed to "prove" it to you?

Bball
01-17-2006, 10:44 PM
BBall, you're completely off-base.

An owner shows commitment to winning with his checkbook.

The Simons aren't responsible for making basketball-related decisions. They can only support the people that do.

An owner shows acceptance of the current business model with his checkbook. That doesn't mean they are driven to win a championship or, more importantly, willing to do what it will take (to give it the best chance possible).

Walsh has already told us all we need to know... we aren't listening. His main priority is maintaining the level of play to keep making the playoffs. The Simons seem absolutely fine with that and show acceptance with their checkbook.

-Bball

Kstat
01-17-2006, 10:48 PM
An owner shows acceptance of the current business model with his checkbook. That doesn't mean they are driven to win a championship or, more importantly, willing to do what it will take (to give it the best chance possible).

Walsh has already told us all we need to know... we aren't listening. His main priority is maintaining the level of play to keep making the playoffs. The Simons seem absolutely fine with that and show acceptance with their checkbook.

-Bball

That makes no sense at all, bball.

What are the Simons supposed to do? Get on the court and play themselves? They didn't trade for Artest. They didnt re-sign croshere and Bender.

I assure you, the Simons could draw the same crowd they do now with a much smaller payroll. They'd be making a lot more money too.

Bball
01-17-2006, 10:51 PM
they dont make the Bball decisions, they just support the people who do

:nod: :bowdown:

-Bball

Kstat
01-17-2006, 10:53 PM
Ok, tlet's go about this one other way:

It IS the owner's responsibility to pick the people that run the team.

If you think that they've shown bad judgement in sticking with Donnie Walsh for 20 years, and THAT makes them bad owners, then at least that's consistent. I might not agree, but at least I'd understand the argument.

Bball
01-17-2006, 10:59 PM
Perhaps I should've asked if Donnie Walsh can build a team to beat a team built by Joe Dumars...
Not just this season, but ever. Unless, Dumars 'loses it' (totally goes away from what he's been doing) then what about the Donnie Walsh model can we hang our hats on to feel confident he can put together a team that trumps Dumars?

-Bball

Arcadian
01-17-2006, 11:01 PM
I can only guess your reasoning is in your opinion Walsh doesn't care and therefore if the Simons have kept him it proves they don't care.

I don't believe theory or any part of it.

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:04 PM
Joe Dumars is hardly flawless. He's made some poor draft picks (along with several brilliant ones).

What separates Dumars from Walsh is that Dumars is very good at cutting his losses, wheras Donnie prefers to stick with the gameplan. I suppose some would say that could be Donnie's strength or his weakness.

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:04 PM
I can only guess your reasoning is in your opinion Walsh doesn't care and therefore if the Simons have kept him it proves they don't care.

I don't believe theory or any part of it.

No, the working theory would be that Donnie is incompetent and the Simons don't care enough to replace him.

Again, not my opinion. Just my guess on the reasoning.

In any case, the theme of this discussion needs to be changed to "Do the Simons make the right personnel decisions," and not, "Do they spend enough money."

And even in that case, it wouldn't mean they didn't care, it'd just make them bad owners.

PacerFan31
01-17-2006, 11:07 PM
yea, they pay all that money just for the hell of it.

*yes they want to win a championship*

Bball
01-17-2006, 11:11 PM
No, the working theory would be that Donnie is incompitent and the Simons don't care enough to replace him.

Again, not my opinion. Just my guess on the reasoning.

I don't think Walsh is incompetent. That doesn't mean he hasn't ran his course here. 10 years ago, getting to the playoffs for Indiana was great. It's not 10 years ago anymore. Can Walsh build a team to compete with those teams in front of us or not? If he can, when do we start doing it?

-Bball

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:14 PM
I don't think Walsh is incompetent. That doesn't mean he hasn't ran his course here. 10 years ago, getting to the playoffs for Indiana was great. It's not 10 years ago anymore. Can Walsh build a team to compete with those teams in front of us or not? If he can, when do we start doing it?

-Bball

Two words: Ron Artest.

He built you a team and it blew up in a month. Twice.

Frank Slade
01-17-2006, 11:16 PM
If the question is simply
Do the Simons want to win an NBA Championship ?

The simple answer is yes... :neutral:

Jon Theodore
01-17-2006, 11:16 PM
You're veering into ridiculous.

bball might be the most intelligent poster, from what i've seen.

But im only here everyday.

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:20 PM
See the Detroit "Sheed" deal. That was a "do or die" If that blows up, it really kills them.

Disagree entirely.

If Rasheed didn't work out, we could have simply let him go after 2004 and re-signed Okur. Very little risk there.

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:25 PM
I disagree.

I think it would have killed you "basketball wise" and "financailly" (wasnt he still seeing a nice pay check in that pay period). Not to mention you guys were not sure what Okur would amount to at the time.

....the amount of salary we traded for Sheed was equal to what we got back.....

basketball-wise, how was there a risk? We were going nowhwere WITHOUT him, so it's not like he was going to ruin our season. So if we let him go after 2004, exactly what would we have lost that we had before we traded for him? WHat was the risk? I don't see it.

Bball
01-17-2006, 11:29 PM
We were going nowhwere WITHOUT him, so it's not like he was going to ruin our season.

Going nowhere? I have no doubt you would've made the playoffs (and should've advanced even) without Sheed. Isn't that good enough? What else is there?

-Bball

SoupIsGood
01-17-2006, 11:30 PM
bball might be the most intelligent poster, from what i've seen.

But im only here everyday.
I never said he wasn't intelligent. I said that this discussion was headed somewhere that made no sense at all.



This feels like one of Bball's DW threads, but I just don't think you can heap the same criticism of DW onto the Simons. Owners who don't care about winning a championship run a franchise much differently than the Simons do IMO.

Kegboy
01-17-2006, 11:34 PM
Bball, I certainly respect your knowledge, but you give every indication that you don't care for any of our players, or the management, or, now, the owners. So, my question is, how can you possibly get tickets every year?

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:35 PM
yeah, there is no risk in taking on the NBA's numbe rone bad boy.

With him, we has a shot at the title. Without him, we didnt have a shot. Really no risk there.

Not to mention we had Ben Wallace to police the locker room.


If you think there is no risk in dealing with him when he doesnt pay off (see trailblazers) go talk to some Blazers fan. He can ruin your name and repuation, and he did that in Portland very well, with a litle bit of help form some teammates.

The difference between us and Portland was that we were only obligated to keep Rasheed for 3 months. Not much damage you can do to a team that wasnt a contender without you to begin with in a 3-month span.


And the risk was exactly my point. You were going nowhere, so Dumars took a risk and was willing to take a chance. When has Donnie done that, ever?.......

I'd say Ron Artest was a massive risk. Re-signing Bender was a risk.

Joe Dumars has taken a lot of risks in his hiring of coaches, not many in personnel. He's never massive overpaid a non-starter, or aquired a nucklehead without a fail-safe plan.

Los Angeles
01-17-2006, 11:37 PM
yeah, there is no risk in taking on the NBA's numbe rone bad boy.

If you think there is no risk in dealing with him when he doesnt pay off (see trailblazers) go talk to some Blazers fan. He can ruin your name and repuation, and he did that in Portland very well, with a litle bit of help form some teammates.

And the risk was exactly my point. You were going nowhere, so Dumars took a risk and was willing to take a chance. When has Donnie done that, ever?.......
ARTEST?!?

Kstat
01-17-2006, 11:40 PM
Going nowhere? I have no doubt you would've made the playoffs (and should've advanced even) without Sheed. Isn't that good enough? What else is there?

-Bball

...and that's my point.

Joe made a brilliant move in that he took on a player that could make us very good, without giving up on his gameplan for the future. Gave up no core pieces, and he had the option to cut bait on the player after 3 months and go back to his original plan to re-sign Okur.

It was half-luck, half-skill. You can say he lucked into it, but Joe was ALSO the only GM in the NBA with enough expiring contracts and draft picks to make that trade. Everybody else had already spent their cap space already.

Even if you say it was skill, a deal like that only comes along once every 5 years.

Bball
01-17-2006, 11:50 PM
Bball, I certainly respect your knowledge, but you give every indication that you don't care for any of our players, or the management, or, now, the owners. So, my question is, how can you possibly get tickets every year?

I like most of our players...
I don't like Tinsley.
My complaints about JO have more to do with the way we're using him and what we're expecting of him. I've tried to be clear about that. I'd like to see him put the "power" back in power forward (concentrate more on rebounding and defense... let the offense come to him and not be -forced- thru him).

Bender was the only other lasting target of my wrath. I don't know that I'd say I didn't like Bender. I just felt he was a bust and we needed to move on.

As for the Simons... I just asked a question and wanted to hear some thoughts. I was expecting some discussion but apparently either the Simons... or me... are polarizing subjects. (Not that there isn't some serious discussion in this thread).

-Bball

Bball
01-17-2006, 11:51 PM
.

Even if you say it was skill, a deal like that only comes along once every 5 years.

..or never, if you don't go looking for those things.

-Bball