PDA

View Full Version : ESPN, you DO love me? Pacers ranked no. 9 all time NBA franchises.



1984
06-27-2010, 11:03 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FranchiseRankings-pacers

No. 9: Indiana Pacers

Hollinger
ESPN

9. INDIANA PACERS: 50.66 POINTS PER SEASON (1967-2009)

<TABLE><TBODY><TR class=last><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" width="20%"><CENTER>http://espn.go.com/i/teamlogos/nba/med/ind.gif</CENTER></TD><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" width="30%">Wins: 1,652
Playoff wins: 111
Series wins: 20.5
Titles: 0 NBA; 3 ABA
All-Stars: 38

</TD><TD style="VERTICAL-ALIGN: middle" width="50%">Best player: Reggie Miller
Best coach: Larry Brown
Best team: 1969-70 (59-25, ABA champions) Intangibles: +0. Thirty years of good karma offset by one bad night in Detroit.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Indiana is basketball country, of course, but during the Hoosier State's history, NBA fans have been rewarded with a serious shortage of topflight stars. In more than three decades since joining the NBA in the ABA-NBA merger, the Pacers have yet to produce a first-team All-NBA performer; the only second-teamer was Jermaine O'Neal (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=615) in 2004.

Indy's glaring lack of star power through the years is underscored by the fact that its one NBA Finals team had a coach (Larry Bird) who was far more renowned in Indiana than any of the players. Its most famous player, Reggie Miller (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=552), made the All-Star team only five times, and from 1977 to 1990 the Pacers didn't have a single representative. And not one Pacer has averaged 20 points a game for his Indiana career, including the ABA years.

<!-- INLINE LIST MODULE -->FRANCHISE HISTORY


Indiana Pacers (NBA) (1976-Present)
Indiana Pacers (ABA) (1967-76)


Nonetheless, Indiana has had quite a bit of team success thanks to a series of ensemble casts. The Pacers made the playoffs 16 times in one 17-year stretch, and two teams in particular stand out: a 61-win team that lost to eventual champion Detroit in the 2004 conference finals, and Bird's 2000 Eastern Conference champions that took the Lakers to six games in the Finals. Unfortunately, Indy never got over the hump, and the Nov. 19, 2004, brawl in the Palace of Auburn Hills marked the unofficial end of that group's run as contenders.

In terms of stars, an earlier generation was a similar case. The Pacers were annually among the ABA's elite, with coach Slick Leonard leading a band of scruffy-but-likable types such as Mel Daniels, Bob Netolicky, Roger Brown and Freddie Lewis to three titles in four years.

Unfortunately, they were already on the downswing when the NBA and ABA merged and had to give up George McGinnis to make ends meet. The Pacers spent the next decade and a half in the doldrums -- it took 18 years, in fact, for them to win a playoff series, when Larry Brown and Donnie Walsh joined forces to usher in two decades of respectability.

tadscout
06-27-2010, 11:11 PM
That was last year's... this year we at #11 -

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2010/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FranchiseRankings2010-Pacers

Hoop
06-27-2010, 11:17 PM
I think ranking us 9th/11th is pretty generous. We were in Clipper territory for many years. I remember going to games at MSA when they used curtains to hide all the empty seats. The Drafting of Chucky P and then Reggie helped change all that. Hopefully we can get back to the elite level before to long.

1: Los Angeles Lakers
2: Boston Celtics
3: San Antonio Spurs
4: Chicago Bulls
5: Phoenix Suns
6: Philadelphia 76ers
7: Utah Jazz
8: Portland Trail Blazers
9: Indiana Pacers
10: Houston Rockets
11: Milwaukee Bucks
12: Oklahoma City Thunder
13: Detroit Pistons
14: Miami Heat
15: Orlando Magic
16: New York Knicks
17: Dallas Mavericks
18: Denver Nuggets
19: Cleveland Cavaliers
20: Golden State Warriors
21: New Jersey Nets
22: Atlanta Hawks
23: Washington Wizards
24: New Orleans Hornets
25: Sacramento Kings
26: Minnesota Timberwolves
27: Toronto Raptors
28: Charlotte Bobcats
29: Los Angeles Clippers
30: Memphis Grizzlies

Edit: 2010
1: Los Angeles Lakers
2: Boston Celtics
3: San Antonio Spurs
4: Chicago Bulls
5: Phoenix Suns
6: Philadelphia 76ers
7: Utah Jazz
8: Portland Trail Blazers
9: Orlando Magic
10: Houston Rockets
11: Indiana Pacers
12: Milwaukee Bucks
13: Oklahoma City Thunder
14: Miami Heat
15: Detroit Pistons
16: Dallas Mavericks
17: New York Knicks
18: Denver Nuggets
19: Cleveland Cavaliers
20: Golden State Warriors
21: Atlanta Hawks
22: New Jersey Nets
23: Washington Wizards
24: New Orleans Hornets
25: Sacramento Kings
26: Toronto Raptors
27: Minnesota Timberwolves
28: Charlotte Bobcats
29: Los Angeles Clippers
30: Memphis Grizzlies

1984
06-27-2010, 11:17 PM
That was last year's... this year we at #11 -

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2010/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=FranchiseRankings2010-Pacers

Thanks for the catch. How sad. I couldn't believe we were in the top 10.

Sollozzo
06-28-2010, 12:18 AM
We are seriously ranked above the Pistons and their 3 NBA championships? This list is a complete joke.

Bball
06-28-2010, 01:50 AM
We are seriously ranked above the Pistons and their 3 NBA championships? This list is a complete joke.

By gosh let's get a banner hanging in Conseco ASAP! Why didn't we get it last season showing the world we were ESPN's number 9 NBA franchise!!??
Take that Pistons!

ndcoltsnpacers
06-28-2010, 03:09 AM
Every small market, big-network-hates-us, conspiracist's head just exploded simultaniously with each other. Including my own.

Trader Joe
06-28-2010, 10:40 AM
Who cares?

Coop
06-28-2010, 10:55 AM
Who cares?

You realize you aren't being forced to read the thread, don't you?

Trader Joe
06-28-2010, 11:06 AM
I'm going to read the thread, I'm also more than allowed to comment on the fact that I think the basic idea of "ranking" franchises is beyond stupid.

This seems to have become a patent response around PD lately when someone comments on a thread being somewhat irrelevant to them or disliking the idea behind a thread.

Hicks
06-28-2010, 11:11 AM
But you didn't say that you thought the idea was stupid, you implied no one cares or should care based on the fact that you don't care. In which case, simply saying nothing isn't a terrible suggestion IMO.

Day-V
06-28-2010, 11:14 AM
I'm really surprised Detroit's that low. I figured they'd be in the top 10.