PDA

View Full Version : This team needs to be blown up (OLD thread!! 2012)



Pages : [1] 2

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 12:04 PM
Last year was fools gold. Besides Stephenson, we have nobody that can beat their man off the dribble and create their own shot. Management doesn't like Lance and was dumb enough to sign Green just so they didn't have to give Lance minutes this year. Hibbert is too slow to consistently be effective, and his contract is laughable. Unless he is in black hole mode, David West also appears too slow to compete in today's NBA. Paul George has shown no improvement since his rookie season, and should be moved. Let somebody else get stiffed on a supposed "franchise" player of the future. If George Hill is your starting PG and the best player, your team is in serious trouble. Our entire bench would be 12th men on contending teams.

ColeTheMole
11-19-2012, 12:16 PM
Last year was fools gold. Besides Stephenson, we have nobody that can beat their man off the dribble and create their own shot. Management doesn't like Lance and was dumb enough to sign Green just so they didn't have to give Lance minutes this year. Hibbert is too slow to consistently be effective, and his contract is laughable. Unless he is in black hole mode, David West also appears too slow to compete in today's NBA. Paul George has shown no improvement since his rookie season, and should be moved. Let somebody else get stiffed on a supposed "franchise" player of the future. If George Hill is your starting PG and the best player, your team is in serious trouble. Our entire bench would be 12th men on contending teams.

C'mon...

vnzla81
11-19-2012, 12:21 PM
I don't think that it needs to be "blown up" but I think they need to make some trades, at this point I trade anybody but Paul George and Hill.

the_reverend
11-19-2012, 12:29 PM
I disagree with 90% of OP's statements. But I do believe we should try to land another scorer. At this point, I believe our most tradeable asset is this years #1 draft pick (likely lottery). Coupling that with a serviceable expiring contract (west, DJ) may yield a couple of options.

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 12:36 PM
I forgot to mention drafting Miles Plumlee. LMAO

Ace E.Anderson
11-19-2012, 12:42 PM
If management didnt like Lance, he'd be gone and would've been gone for a whole by now.

joew8302
11-19-2012, 12:51 PM
I don't think that it needs to be "blown up" but I think they need to make some trades, at this point I trade anybody but Paul George and Hill.

Agreed, but I would take it a step further: if anyone offered us a really sweet deal, such as lottery picks, I would have an open mind about these two.

I think we could get something halfway decent for West on an expiring contract, but other than him do you really see there being much of a market for anyone else on this roster? I just can't see it unless we are trading garbage for garbage.

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 12:56 PM
If management didnt like Lance, he'd be gone and would've been gone for a whole by now.

They don't like him. Traded for Barbosa last season and signed Green this year. Theses two took Lance's minutes

Speed
11-19-2012, 12:57 PM
Maybe Larry Bird IS walking through that door at seasons end? I mean this sincerely, maybe this is a situation that gets his blood pumping again, lets him have his hand at righting the ship, if it doesn't get corrected on its own.

Two things: Walsh will say, if he hasn't already that they need to see how this team does over time. So, as Pecks says on Odd thoughts today, a fix will have to come from within if it happens this season. Secondly, that doesn't mean they can't and won't hand the wheel back to Larry in May. I think you can argue whether he's the answer going forward or not, but he's as straight forward as you can get.

Blown up is a really tough way to go, in its true sense, plan on sucking for 5 years, not sure the franchise or city can endure that. Now, rearrange the things if they don't get better, absolutely, but it won't be Donnie doing it, maybe KP, but my money is on Bird.

So here we are 4-7 heading out west in a week, after looking awful in all but about 2 or 3 quarters all year. I think they are better than what they've shown. I don't think what we've seen, so far, is the norm. Its too big a drop. I think they start to play tied together lock down defense and have a HUGE upgrade to below average offensively. I'm not chatising for the negative reactions, hell, I'm with you, its unwatchable. I'm just saying lets get through the middle of January and see if they are still standing, things get much more favorable the last few months. Its a marathon, not a sprint. I don't see how blowing it up is an option, unless there's a Lebron or Durant in this AND next years draft, it could mean blowing up the Pacers in Indiana. That, none of us are for.

cdash
11-19-2012, 12:58 PM
I don't think that it needs to be "blown up" but I think they need to make some trades, at this point I trade anybody but Paul George and Hill.

Isn't this the very definition of blowing it up?

vnzla81
11-19-2012, 01:08 PM
Isn't this the very definition of blowing it up?

Kind of, my thinking is when you want to blow it up you don't think about keeping anybody, in my case I'm thinking about keeping 2 players maybe 3.

In reality I don't expect Danny(because of injury and contract), Roy(because of suckiness and contract), Green(see Roy) and Ian(see Roy) to go anywhere, so at the end of the day the Pacers are keeping 6 to 8 players from the current team.

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 01:10 PM
If management didnt like Lance, he'd be gone and would've been gone for a whole by now.

They don't like him. Traded for Barbosa last season and signed Green this year. Theses two took Lance's minutes

xtacy
11-19-2012, 01:12 PM
I don't think that it needs to be "blown up" but I think they need to make some trades, at this point I trade anybody but Paul George and Hill.

yeah. but i disagree about those two. they are far from being untouchable.

xIndyFan
11-19-2012, 01:18 PM
Agreed, but I would take it a step further: if anyone offered us a really sweet deal, such as lottery picks, I would have an open mind about these two.

I think we could get something halfway decent for West on an expiring contract, but other than him do you really see there being much of a market for anyone else on this roster? I just can't see it unless we are trading garbage for garbage.

It seems the same thing is true about this year's team as last year's team. No one is really untouchable. If the Pacers can make a trade to get a better player back than they give, they would do it. That much seems clear. What probably isn't going to happen is a trade where the Pacers trade a player for a pick and a prospect or two. I could see a player and a pick or a player and another player going out for a better player coming back. But there is no chance the Pacers 'blow it up' this year. This bunch will be given the chance to do what they do this year.

kielbeze
11-19-2012, 01:47 PM
I hate to burst your bubble but be cool. This is a game where you can really say missing Granger hurt. We have had some games where we could have had Granger and it would make no difference. This was not one of them. Add at least 16 from Danny. Take a few points from NY due to his defense. Add a few for Roy due to being able score eaiser and Spread 6 between Green, Young, and Lance What does that give you? Lets break down a scenario. 76-15 (Green, Young, Lance) + 16 (Danny) + 6 (Lance, Young, Green) +4 (Roy)=87 Ny 88-2 (danny's d) 86 Pacers WIN. I'm not saying this is how it would have went down, just an example.
Newsflash were going to lose games to good teams who have a full roster!

MikeDC
11-19-2012, 01:49 PM
Well, there's only so much blowing up you can do if nobody wants the players you've got.
I'd say
1. To trade Roy or Granger at this point, you'd get no value at all. So you're better off hoping the former gets it together and the latter gets healthy.
2. I don't that trading GH would help, since whatever hole you filled by trading him, another would be opened up by his absence.

I'd be open to trading PG if it'd get us something we need, but at least at the moment we sort of need him as well, with Granger being hurt. He might not have turned into the franchise player some folks expected, but he's a generally solid player. And still has some time on his rookie deal, so he's got some value. One sort of move to consider would be trading him for another younger player whose existing team things is going to leave. It wouldn't be completely crazy to imagine trading him for a guy like Tyreke Evans. Evans is much more of an offensive player than PG, and he would bring something to the team. He's in the last year of his rookie deal, and thus, Sacramento has sucked, so they might be willing to take back a talented and cheaper player like George rather than pay or lose him for nothing.

Tyler is sort of our version of Evans. He's shown something, but I don't look at him and thing "man, it's essential we keep him", and I think there's a strong possibility he could go somewhere else. Bigger guys that can score always get raises. For us... not sure he's worth it. Some team that could really use scoring (besides us) might be able to make use of him, but I doubt they'd give up that much to have a look. Maybe they'd give up a similarly flawed player on a similar contract.

West... he seems like the most obvious trading "chip" we have, in that he's a good player on a reasonable expiring contract. Any team in the league, but especially good ones should be happy to have him for a playoff run. But... I'm pretty confident that we'd absolutely implode without him. So that's an issue. And while lots of teams would like to have him, most teams that are good aren't going to give up too much for him because... then that would defeat the purpose of making a trade in the first place. He's the sort of guy who you'd either get back a player on a longer deal for, or a pick. Which are reasonable returns, i guess, but still not exactly outstanding.

Best case scenario I can think of:
1. Paul George for Tyreke Evans
2. Tyler, West for Caleron, Ed Davis, maybe a pick.

Pacers
PG Calderon/Hill
SG Hill/Evans
SF Evans/Green/Young {Granger}
PF Davis/Plumlee/Pendergraph
_C Hibbert/Mahinmi

When and if Granger comes back healthy, you go with Hill/Evans/Granger and try hard to find yourself a good 4 down the road.

WhoLovesYaBaby?
11-19-2012, 01:51 PM
Last year was fools gold. Besides Stephenson, we have nobody that can beat their man off the dribble and create their own shot. Management doesn't like Lance and was dumb enough to sign Green just so they didn't have to give Lance minutes this year. Hibbert is too slow to consistently be effective, and his contract is laughable. Unless he is in black hole mode, David West also appears too slow to compete in today's NBA. Paul George has shown no improvement since his rookie season, and should be moved. Let somebody else get stiffed on a supposed "franchise" player of the future. If George Hill is your starting PG and the best player, your team is in serious trouble. Our entire bench would be 12th men on contending teams.


I wondered when we would see one of these threads.

Hey, I have a better idea for you --

follow another team.

xtacy
11-19-2012, 02:29 PM
I wondered when we would see one of these threads.

Hey, I have a better idea for you --

follow another team.

and i have a better idea for you. don't read this thread. it's easier than following another team. just try.

trust me everone on this board including the ones in this thread wants this team to be good. but we suck right now and we want this to change as much as you do. this is a thread where people write their opinions on how to change it. call it overreacting, kneejerk i don't care. the thread title perfectly explains what kind of things will be written in this thread. if you don't want to see those overreaction posts don't read. and if you disagree just say it without telling people ******** like to follow other teams. this "we want/know the best for this team, you jerks are just overreacting" attitude is just ****.

Biggy5355
11-19-2012, 02:54 PM
If the Pacers blow up this team they will become the Seattle Supersonics before we're good again.

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 02:56 PM
I wondered when we would see one of these threads.

Hey, I have a better idea for you --

follow another team.

I will never follow another team. I would rather die!

Shade
11-19-2012, 02:59 PM
The main problem, again, is that we don't have a true PG. Hill is a good player, but he isn't a PG. This was a glaring flaw going into the off-season that TPTB failed to address. So the offense is still struggling.

Ace E.Anderson
11-19-2012, 03:00 PM
They don't like him. Traded for Barbosa last season and signed Green this year. Theses two took Lance's minutes

Well he hadn't exactly shown a reason to be placed within the rotation until this season. When you're in "win-now" mode you normally go with guys that have demonstrated an ability to produce, not a 2nd round pick who hadn't shown anything except a few good games in summer league. Dont get me wrong, I love Lance, but he his play hadn't warranted many mins till this year.

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 03:02 PM
This is a poorly constructed team. All the signs were there after we had Miami on the ropes, and then lost 3 straight. We don't have a "go to" scorer, and its impossible to win without one. Last year was awesome, but its in the past and is looking like a fluke. Thinking this group will get things together and play like last years team is irrational and a fantasy

Shade
11-19-2012, 03:03 PM
This is a poorly constructed team. All the signs were there after we had Miami on the ropes, and then lost 3 straight. We don't have a "go to" scorer, and its impossible to win without one. Last year was awesome, but its in the past and is looking like a fluke. Thinking this group will get things together and play like last years team is irrational and a fantasy

You can win without a "go to" guy if you have a good offensive system and a PG that can run it. We have neither.

pathil275
11-19-2012, 03:11 PM
I think we are a very slow team, both Hibbert and West or Hill aren't the most agile players on their position so ball movement is rather slow as well. Especially if you take into account that some of our core players aren't the best ball handlers either.

With that being said you need either someone who can create his own shot and draws occasionally a second defender or you need someone who can penetrate by attacking the rim in order to create space for the rest of the team. In my opinion we lack both. The slashing was the one strength of Collison, but he lacked other things to make me miss him.

So while there are many advantages our current lineup brings to the table -defense, length, rebounding- there are still significant flaws that have to be addressed. Yes, I still hope that Paul George gets more aggressive on offense and handles the ball better but honestly I don't see that happening (this season).

Ideally the person who's able to create his own shot is also a threat from beyond the arc.

doctor-h
11-19-2012, 03:16 PM
I think management and the owner should be blown up first. It doesn't do any good to bring new players into a situation where the owner doesn't care if the team wins or not. The president and gm don't have a clue and have come to the conclusion that no top flight player would want to play for their franchise. They apparently do not know what a difference maker player is. Teams like the Knicks go out and get veteran, proven players to come off their bench. Players that have proven they can get it done in this league. We get projects, throw away assets such as draft picks like they mean nothing and pray something will fall in our lap.

Speed
11-19-2012, 03:16 PM
The main problem, again, is that we don't have a true PG. Hill is a good player, but he isn't a PG. This was a glaring flaw going into the off-season that TPTB failed to address. So the offense is still struggling.

Agreed, I really like Hill as a combo guard, first guard off the bench. Last true Point Guard they've had was Tinsley for 1.5 months his rookie season then Mark Jackson. Even Mark had flaws, but he still made guys around him better. Its a rare breed, but unless you get one, you can't be constructed as they are (minus a superstar) and have longevity. So ya, easy to say get a true point guard or a superstar, nearly impossible to do.

Side notes: I'm a fan of George Hill defensively as a point guard. I might be tainted by the long history of bad defensive point guards they've had, too.

How about one exceptional passer to run things through even, I don't mean crazy And One passing, just court vision, willingness, and ability.
As currently constructed they are just poor passers, poor at getting open. If you have a great passer, guys tend to get open more often, because they know they'll get the ball. It's not surprising if you think about it, they were one of the poorest teams I have ever seen at any level at running the break last year.

One more observation to throw in. Could the new guys look any less interested in Mahimni and Augustine? I liked the moves, but I can't believe how indifferent these two look and play.

BillS
11-19-2012, 03:17 PM
I think management and the owner should be blown up first. It doesn't do any good to bring new players into a situation where the owner doesn't care if the team wins or not. The president and gm don't have a clue and have come to the conclusion that no top flight player would want to play for their franchise. They apparently do not know what a difference maker player is. Teams like the Knicks go out and get veteran, proven players to come off their bench. Players that have proven they can get it done in this league. We get projects, throw away assets such as draft picks like they mean nothing and pray something will fall in our lap.

So who do you have in mind as the new owner, and where would they move the team?

MvPlumlee
11-19-2012, 03:17 PM
The main problem, again, is that we don't have a true PG. Hill is a good player, but he isn't a PG. This was a glaring flaw going into the off-season that TPTB failed to address. So the offense is still struggling.

Augustin is a true PG. We just don't have the bigs to run the pick and roll, slow footed and unhandy as they are. Pick and pop might work with West, Mahinmi and Hibbert if he can practice on it first.

Shuffle the rotation and give them more freedom on offense first before blowing things up.

mrknowname
11-19-2012, 03:21 PM
the roster doesn't need to be blown up, just need to be tweaked. some of the players are redundant skill wise. granger, george, and green all have a similar skill set. ideally you'd want at least one who can break his man down off the dribble or catch and shoot off screens. even west and hansbrough are a little redundant.

a bench of hansbrough, green, and stephenson on paper should be pretty good in transition


one other thing i don't like is west and hibbert together defensively. both have cement in their shoes and struggle on pick and roll defense

Speed
11-19-2012, 03:21 PM
Augustin is a true PG. We just don't have the bigs to run the pick and roll, slow footed and unhandy as they are. Pick and pop might work with West, Mahinmi and Hibbert if he can practice on it first.

Shuffle the rotation and give them more freedom on offense first before blowing things up.

He's horrible. I mean just awful. Really should not play a minute, if all things were equal and this was a team that was just playing guys based on what they provide, he might get cut. If he doesn't assert himself soon and no that doesn't mean start jacking up shots like is being said, then I hope he gets DNP/CD really soon. Same with Mahimni. I couldn't be more frustrated with Augustine and couldn't be happier its only a one year deal.

MvPlumlee
11-19-2012, 03:33 PM
He's horrible. I mean just awful. Really should not play a minute, if all things were equal and this was a team that was just playing guys based on what they provide, he might get cut. If he doesn't assert himself soon and no that doesn't mean start jacking up shots like is being said, then I hope he gets DNP/CD really soon. Same with Mahimni. I couldn't be more frustrated with Augustine and couldn't be happier its only a one year deal.

And Vogel is awful in using him. Augustin just like Collison needs a higher tempo and more freedom to get it going. I don't understand why Frank doesn't let our bench run more. It would be better for all three of them: Augustin, Green, Mahinmi.

ejwallace
11-19-2012, 03:53 PM
And Vogel is awful in using him. Augustin just like Collison needs a higher tempo and more freedom to get it going. I don't understand why Frank doesn't let our bench run more. It would be better for all three of them: Augustin, Green, Mahinmi.

I couldn't agree more....People were clamoring to get rid of Collison last year, and look at what he is doing now....The same people that wanted him gone are begging for him to come back. The problem doesn't lie solely on the talent, our issue is how we use our talent. Collison and Augustin are both fast paced distributers that have done well for themselves everywhere other than Indy, so OBVIOUSLY the player is the issue, not the system they're in and how they're used....

doctor-h
11-19-2012, 04:07 PM
So who do you have in mind as the new owner, and where would they move the team?

The point was, this team is not going to seriously get better until the owner becomes committed. They are not going to put fans in the seats until they become committed to winning and bring in a product that people want to see. They need a draw and they have none. They keep selling us on the idea that they can win without a player that can carry a team when it struggles. They can not. Just like tonights game. There is no player you can count on to come out and play great, you have to keep your fingers crossed and hope someone shows up. We don't have that reliable guy that plays well on most nights.

Since86
11-19-2012, 04:10 PM
And you know how committed or how uncommitted Herb is based off what exactly?

doctor-h
11-19-2012, 04:19 PM
Now I read on hoopshype that the Pacers showed interest in Rashard McCants before he signed with a team in China. This GM doesn't get it. We need proven players not more projects.

doctor-h
11-19-2012, 04:25 PM
And you know how committed or how uncommitted Herb is based off what exactly?

Do you ever hear him say this is not acceptable. Do you ever hear him hold himself accountable for anything. He has obviously put restraints on the GM or we wouldn't be talking about guys like McCants. Does anyone think McCants would help turn this thing around. If you care you will do whatever it takes to put fans in the stands. Obviously the people in charge don't know how to do it. He seems oblivious to what is going on and to me that is not commitment.

owl
11-19-2012, 04:30 PM
He's horrible. I mean just awful. Really should not play a minute, if all things were equal and this was a team that was just playing guys based on what they provide, he might get cut. If he doesn't assert himself soon and no that doesn't mean start jacking up shots like is being said, then I hope he gets DNP/CD really soon. Same with Mahimni. I couldn't be more frustrated with Augustine and couldn't be happier its only a one year deal.

I am with you on this. I have made my desires known on this situation. The Pacers need to try something else.
Mahinimi is not far behind. If things continue to be this bad it is time to play Plumlee and Ben H. Certainly by the half way point if things are still the same. It is really sad to watch the way the team is playing. Fumbling balls, watching rebounds waiting for someone else to get it, horrible shooting, etc..

Shade
11-19-2012, 04:41 PM
DJ has been horrendous so far. He looks either lost or out of control most of the time.


Augustin is a true PG. We just don't have the bigs to run the pick and roll, slow footed and unhandy as they are. Pick and pop might work with West, Mahinmi and Hibbert if he can practice on it first.

Shuffle the rotation and give them more freedom on offense first before blowing things up.

billbradley
11-19-2012, 04:43 PM
Do you ever hear him say this is not acceptable.

Because most NBA owners find success that way.


Do you ever hear him hold himself accountable for anything. He has obviously put restraints on the GM or we wouldn't be talking about guys like McCants.

How is that obvious? Who do you suggest we talk to?


Does anyone think McCants would help turn this thing around. If you care you will do whatever it takes to put fans in the stands. Obviously the people in charge don't know how to do it. He seems oblivious to what is going on and to me that is not commitment.

You think we are just going to magically blow it and be the Thunder? Is it possible that the team is fine or there isn't a deal to be done right now that makes them better? We can't even move Hill or Hibbert January, and most other teams are in the same boat with new signings.

Simon has nothing to do with our players not making shots. Simon has nothing to do with our max guy not stepping up. Simon has done his part. Signed players and made great improvements to BLF.

McKeyFan
11-19-2012, 04:51 PM
My two cents is that our offense is initiated by the wings, not the point guard, so we have a problem because our number one wing can't initiate anything.

Granger, if covered from the perimeter, was able to make something happen. Paul George can't. He makes a turnover, he drives hell bent into traffic and gets blocked, he charges, he is not quick to find the open man.

Lance and Hill should play those two roles. Frankly, I don't care if Paul George sits. Great kid, nice defender at times (though makes a lot of mistakes), and nice rebounder, but we don't need rebounds at the two. We need offensive production.

Somebody with stones needs to step up and make this happen.

WhoLovesYaBaby?
11-19-2012, 05:00 PM
and i have a better idea for you. don't read this thread. it's easier than following another team. just try.

trust me everone on this board including the ones in this thread wants this team to be good. but we suck right now and we want this to change as much as you do. this is a thread where people write their opinions on how to change it. call it overreacting, kneejerk i don't care. the thread title perfectly explains what kind of things will be written in this thread. if you don't want to see those overreaction posts don't read. and if you disagree just say it without telling people ******** like to follow other teams. this "we want/know the best for this team, you jerks are just overreacting" attitude is just ****.

Who's talking to you?

naptownmenace
11-19-2012, 05:09 PM
I disagree. The team doesn't need to be blown up. They lost to a good team yesterday. They couldn't beat the Knicks in New York last season with Granger so we should've known they weren't going to win yesterday.

The team needs some changes but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

repole
11-19-2012, 05:10 PM
Maybe Larry Bird IS walking through that door at seasons end?

I figured I wouldn't have to see the "walking through the door" line anywhere but on Celtics forums. Apparently Rick Pitino's legacy goes on :)

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 05:41 PM
My two cents is that our offense is initiated by the wings, not the point guard, so we have a problem because our number one wing can't initiate anything.

Granger, if covered from the perimeter, was able to make something happen. Paul George can't. He makes a turnover, he drives hell bent into traffic and gets blocked, he charges, he is not quick to find the open man.

Lance and Hill should play those two roles. Frankly, I don't care if Paul George sits. Great kid, nice defender at times (though makes a lot of mistakes), and nice rebounder, but we don't need rebounds at the two. We need offensive production.

Somebody with stones needs to step up and make this happen.

Agreed. I don't know what Paul has done to deserve so many minutes this year. I think his defense is overrated.

Trophy
11-19-2012, 05:45 PM
So who do you have in mind as the new owner, and where would they move the team?

Stephen Simon, the son of Herb has already been said to be the next owner of the team.

I don't get why moving is mentioned are here? Ownership changes occur all the time and it doesn't mean moving.

It's ridiculous this is brought up.

Heisenberg
11-19-2012, 05:46 PM
I'm open to blowing it up.

But it doesn't matter, it's not happening. The franchise couldn't survive it, they'd completely lose the city/state. So there's no point in really talking about it.

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 05:50 PM
I'm open to blowing it up.

But it doesn't matter, it's not happening. The franchise couldn't survive it, they'd completely lose the city/state. So there's no point in really talking about it.

We cannot survive another 4 year run of losing, which is where this group is headed. We suffered enough during the JOB years. This city needs a championship. We have waited long enough

Sookie
11-19-2012, 05:50 PM
Chill. Out.

Are there some flaws? Yes. But the core of this group is likely to be successful once healthy.

Let's wait for our best player to get back. kthx.

Heisenberg
11-19-2012, 05:53 PM
We cannot survive another 4 year run of losing, which is where this group is headed. We suffered enough during the JOB years. This city needs a championship. We have waited long enough
The team sucks right now. There's a gigantic possibility they don't suck for the next 4 years, and it's pretty likely. Title? No. But playoffs and wins. It's not ideal, but much better than the alternative.

Blowing it up means the team unquestionably sucks for multiple years. That's how you lose a state.

Speed
11-19-2012, 05:57 PM
Chill. Out.

Are there some flaws? Yes. But the core of this group is likely to be successful once healthy.

Let's wait for our best player to get back. kthx.

1.) I hope you are right.

2.) I'd like to nominate Sookie for Sunshiner of the year.

BillS
11-19-2012, 06:02 PM
Stephen Simon, the son of Herb has already been said to be the next owner of the team.

I don't get why moving is mentioned are here? Ownership changes occur all the time and it doesn't mean moving.

It's ridiculous this is brought up.

Ownership changes will mean moving if no one local can be found to buy the team. I can understand dismissing it as a low probability if current ownership remains in charge, but why is it ridiculous to point it out as a possible outcome of "demanding" new ownership?

In your point about Steve Simon, who's to say he would have any different philosophy from Herb?

BlueNGold
11-19-2012, 06:09 PM
If the Pacers didn't move when Britton Johnson was in the starting lineup, it's not moving now. It's November people. Adjustments will be made and things are likely to change.

HOOPFANATIC
11-19-2012, 06:14 PM
The problem is not that we need a true point guard,the problem is not that Hibbert sucks, It's not the players at all it is the front office especially Bird/ Pritchard. Pendergraph, Mahimmi, Augustine, Green, and if not for some luck we'd have Craig Smith, and Rashad McCants. How in the last four seasons How has this not been Birds M.O; we once again have a bunch of D-league like players. Think Diener, Solo, Luther Head, Earl Watson. Only difference is these new guys are now all signed to long-term deals.

Also I do not understand why a larger contract is supposed to make a guy better Roy is what he is and what he is is pretty good. He is a defensive minded Center who is a solid shotblocker and rebounder, he is not a scorer, and I have no idea why we are trying to make him one. He was certainly never more than the fourth option last year.

vnzla81
11-19-2012, 06:16 PM
The team sucks right now. There's a gigantic possibility they don't suck for the next 4 years, and it's pretty likely. Title? No. But playoffs and wins. It's not ideal, but much better than the alternative.

Blowing it up means the team unquestionably sucks for multiple years. That's how you lose a state.

They suck right now anyway :laugh: and yes probably making it to the playoffs is fun and all but if there is not hope to pass the first round what's the point?

Call me crazy but in this crappy Eastern conference there is a chance that multiple rebuilding teams make it to the playoff, so they are accomplishing two things, the rebuilding plus they are making it to the playoffs to keep their fans happy, I think the Pacers can do that too.

Heisenberg
11-19-2012, 06:18 PM
They suck right now anyway :laugh: and yes probably making it to the playoffs is fun and all but if there is not hope to pass the first round what's the point?

Call me crazy but in this crappy Eastern conference there is a chance that multiple rebuilding teams make it to the playoff, so they are accomplishing two things, the rebuilding plus they are making it to the playoffs to keep their fans happy, I think the Pacers can do that too.Did you even read the first part of the post? You try harder to build narratives than ESPN.

BlueNGold
11-19-2012, 06:18 PM
I disagree. The team doesn't need to be blown up. They lost to a good team yesterday. They couldn't beat the Knicks in New York last season with Granger so we should've known they weren't going to win yesterday.

The team needs some changes but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

This is the truth nobody wants to admit.

Last year we were a good team. This year we took a small step back personnel-wise, but we could still be pretty good if Granger were available. His perimeter shooting is just that important to this team.

But the point is, the Knicks are a really good team. They are up there with the Chicago's and Miami's in the East...because they simply have a lot more talent than the Pacers. Chicago didn't have Derrick Rose last year and they are better as well. We benefited from Dwight and DRose being out last year.

So, here we are. Granger is out and we've taken a small step back with the trades. It should be no surprise we got beat bad by NY and San Antonio which is also one of the very best teams in the league.

vnzla81
11-19-2012, 06:19 PM
Did you even read the first part of the post? You try harder to build narratives than ESPN.

Whoa, I was just trying to ad more to your comment, sorry for replying to your post.

Nuntius
11-19-2012, 07:08 PM
Last year was fools gold.

So, a whole season (even if it was a lock out one) was fools gold but 11 games are a valid sample size?

Nuntius
11-19-2012, 07:11 PM
They suck right now anyway :laugh: and yes probably making it to the playoffs is fun and all but if there is not hope to pass the first round what's the point?


And who said that they have no hope to pass the first round?

Pacergeek
11-19-2012, 07:15 PM
So, a whole season (even if it was a lock out one) was fools gold but 11 games are a valid sample size?

It sure is. We lost to Charlotte, a bad Toronto team at home, got blown out by a Bucks team we owned a season ago, got trounced by San Antonio, lost to a Minnesota team without their top player. destroyed by a Knicks team after coming off our best win of the year. Our schedule has been very favorable over the first 11 games. If we were any good at all, we would be at worst 7-4

Nuntius
11-19-2012, 07:19 PM
It sure is. We lost to Charlotte, a bad Toronto team at home, got blown out by a Bucks team we owned a season ago, got trounced by San Antonio, lost to a Minnesota team without their top player. destroyed by a Knicks team after coming off our best win of the year. Our schedule has been very favorable over the first 11 games. If we were any good at all, we would be at worst 7-4

No, it isn't a valid sample size. Wanna know why?

Cause Granger will not be out for the whole season. If he is to be out for the whole season then I agree with your point. But he isn't, so your argument is invalid.

3rdStrike
11-19-2012, 09:04 PM
No, it isn't a valid sample size. Wanna know why?

Cause Granger will not be out for the whole season. If he is to be out for the whole season then I agree with your point. But he isn't, so your argument is invalid.

There's absolutely no guarantee he will be able to play this season, since he opted to not have surgery. So your counterargument is invalid until we see what happens.

I'd like to see some creative trade ideas. I think we would need to take on somebody who is high upside but on a short leash. Otherwise, we'd be selling the farm. For example, something like Hibbert & a 1st for Royce White and Asik would help. Houston's got so much young depth that they don't need White at all, and they're clearly looking for some legitimacy inside. Hibbert has been horrible this season, but he's more offensive minded than Asik and would benefit from playing with Lin/Harden. Royce White is a headcase, but he is going to be a stat sheet stuffing wing if he ever gets on the court, and he brings the element that this team needs more than any other: playmaking ability.

Nuntius
11-19-2012, 09:56 PM
There's absolutely no guarantee he will be able to play this season, since he opted to not have surgery. So your counterargument is invalid until we see what happens.


Isn't he supposed to be back in February?

If yes, then why wouldn't he be able to play this season?

BobbyMac
11-19-2012, 10:05 PM
Last year was fools gold. Besides Stephenson, we have nobody that can beat their man off the dribble and create their own shot. Management doesn't like Lance and was dumb enough to sign Green just so they didn't have to give Lance minutes this year. Hibbert is too slow to consistently be effective, and his contract is laughable. Unless he is in black hole mode, David West also appears too slow to compete in today's NBA. Paul George has shown no improvement since his rookie season, and should be moved. Let somebody else get stiffed on a supposed "franchise" player of the future. If George Hill is your starting PG and the best player, your team is in serious trouble. Our entire bench would be 12th men on contending teams.

LOL, that's got to be a joke.

Nuntius
11-19-2012, 10:05 PM
Royce White is a headcase, but he is going to be a stat sheet stuffing wing if he ever gets on the court, and he brings the element that this team needs more than any other: playmaking ability.

1) Royce White is not a headcase. He has a legitimate and diagnosed mental disease.

2) I don't think that we would be able to put his playmaking ability into good use.

xIndyFan
11-19-2012, 10:07 PM
1) Royce White is not a headcase. He has a legitimate and diagnosed mental disease.

2) I don't think that we would be able to put his playmaking ability into good use.

plus if Royce White was the answer, he'd be playing already.

Slick Pinkham
11-19-2012, 10:29 PM
I disagree with 90% of OP's statements.

I'm more like 0.9%.

wintermute
11-19-2012, 10:30 PM
1.) I hope you are right.

2.) I'd like to nominate Sookie for Sunshiner of the year.

The sad thing is, I think Sookie's post is very level-headed/middle of the road. Yet it looks like sunshiny optimism right now.


Isn't he supposed to be back in February?

If yes, then why wouldn't he be able to play this season?

It wouldn't surprise me if Granger did miss the season. His injury seems to be a bit unusual - as such, I think the 3 month timetable for recovery is more of a guideline. He could also be back earlier, sure. But it seems that it usually doesn't work out that way.



Royce White is a headcase, but he is going to be a stat sheet stuffing wing if he ever gets on the court, and he brings the element that this team needs more than any other: playmaking ability.

He's not a wing at all - more of an undersized F/C type really. Aside from his other issues, it's not really clear whether he has an NBA position. So I wouldn't pin any hopes of a quick turnaround on a Royce White trade, even if you think his other issues can be ignored.

Why not go for Burks instead as in the other thread. A much better fit who also provides some playmaking from the SG position.

Heisenberg
11-19-2012, 10:46 PM
It's like we didn't just win a game with our max player finally playing great. Not even a hint of optimism.

2minutes twoa
11-19-2012, 11:01 PM
They don't like him. Traded for Barbosa last season and signed Green this year. Theses two took Lance's minutes

Yes, they hate Lance so much that they made him a starter! If they really get sick of him they'll extend his contract!

Mr.ThunderMakeR
11-19-2012, 11:03 PM
It's like we didn't just win a game with our max player finally playing great. Not even a hint of optimism.Wallowing in our misery makes for so much better discussion. Leave us alone!

beast23
11-19-2012, 11:12 PM
At this point, TPTB has no other choice than to weather the storm.

This team has several good pieces, even as disfunctional as they presently seem to be. But blowing things up or even trading a couple of the top players? That's idiotic and something that management would not and will not do at this point.

Why? There a couple of reasons.

As has been pointed out, we are barely 10% into the season and it's certainly no time for panic and a knee-jerk reaction. If I had reacted this way every time one of my funds or stock choices dipped a little, I'd ended up working until I was 70 and not retiring at 57. We have invested in a few players, so let's take a deep breath, take a step back and ponder the situation.

In doing this it directly leads to reason #2. We have no idea how this team would perform with the insertion of Granger into the lineup. It could be that some of you are right, and TPTB has created a flawed team from the start. But, I think that it is even more likely that Granger is the missing link that enables the other pieces to perform much better. Now, I will be the first to admit that such a dependence on a single player in itself constitutes a flaw. But if this is the case, having waited for Granger's return will have provided the clarity to determine that. We would also have a very good starting point for further improving the team. In my opinion, that is far wiser than getting rid of players and possibly setting us back a year or two in our roster development.

The best players on teams usually have qualities that are not duplicated by others on the roster. Without that redundancy, teams are gong to suffer when their best player is unavailable. The only thing that might differ from team to team is the degree to which they will miss that player. For the Pacers, we miss Granger a hell of a lot.

(And yes, I think it is apparent to even his biggest detractors that Granger can now be identified as our best player.).

ilive4sports
11-19-2012, 11:21 PM
Thats why we Cellar for Zeller!

Sandman21
11-19-2012, 11:29 PM
Remember the last time fans and sponsors forced the team to "blow up" the roster?


Here's a hint:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_bebQghBR6rU/Rs33VmfBukI/AAAAAAAAAKs/Bul1hg9x9pI/s400/murphy-dunleavy.jpg

HELL. NO.

vnzla81
11-19-2012, 11:31 PM
Remember the last time fans and sponsors forced the team to "blow up" the roster?


Here's a hint:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_bebQghBR6rU/Rs33VmfBukI/AAAAAAAAAKs/Bul1hg9x9pI/s400/murphy-dunleavy.jpg

HELL. NO.

Not a good example, bringing two huge contracts is not blowing it up.

beast23
11-19-2012, 11:39 PM
Remember the last time fans and sponsors forced the team to "blow up" the roster?


Here's a hint:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_bebQghBR6rU/Rs33VmfBukI/AAAAAAAAAKs/Bul1hg9x9pI/s400/murphy-dunleavy.jpg

HELL. NO.
I think you may need to re-evaluate that. There is a huge difference between an EXplosion and an IMplosion.

boombaby1987
11-20-2012, 12:20 AM
I think if we were to trade anyone it should be Paul George. Unfortunately, I think most of us can agree, he doesn't have "it".

Sandman21
11-20-2012, 12:45 AM
My point is still clear, if y'all want to blow up the roster so bad, be careful what you wish for. The way that some of you are wanting to do this is only going to land us **** sandwiches.....

Heisenberg
11-20-2012, 12:57 AM
My point is still clear, if y'all want to blow up the roster so bad, be careful what you wish for. The way that some of you are wanting to do this is only going to land us **** sandwiches.....
I get what you're saying, and in general agree, "blow it up!" guarantees absolutely nothing but being bad for at least some amount of time, but what we have now is monumentally more attractive than what we had then. The guys we HAD to move then were legitimate negative value guys, and not because of money. It is a rather poor example, but I do agree with the overall point.

xtacy
11-20-2012, 02:21 AM
Who's talking to you?

ok i'm clearly not talking to you becasue you obviously don't have the ability to understand. people exactly react the way you do when they simply don't understand.

Pacergeek
11-20-2012, 02:50 AM
At this point, TPTB has no other choice than to weather the storm.

This team has several good pieces, even as disfunctional as they presently seem to be. But blowing things up or even trading a couple of the top players? That's idiotic and something that management would not and will not do at this point.

Why? There a couple of reasons.

As has been pointed out, we are barely 10% into the season and it's certainly no time for panic and a knee-jerk reaction. If I had reacted this way every time one of my funds or stock choices dipped a little, I'd ended up working until I was 70 and not retiring at 57. We have invested in a few players, so let's take a deep breath, take a step back and ponder the situation.

In doing this it directly leads to reason #2. We have no idea how this team would perform with the insertion of Granger into the lineup. It could be that some of you are right, and TPTB has created a flawed team from the start. But, I think that it is even more likely that Granger is the missing link that enables the other pieces to perform much better. Now, I will be the first to admit that such a dependence on a single player in itself constitutes a flaw. But if this is the case, having waited for Granger's return will have provided the clarity to determine that. We would also have a very good starting point for further improving the team. In my opinion, that is far wiser than getting rid of players and possibly setting us back a year or two in our roster development.

The best players on teams usually have qualities that are not duplicated by others on the roster. Without that redundancy, teams are gong to suffer when their best player is unavailable. The only thing that might differ from team to team is the degree to which they will miss that player. For the Pacers, we miss Granger a hell of a lot.

(And yes, I think it is apparent to even his biggest detractors that Granger can now be identified as our best player.).

I understand that we would be a better team with Granger, but not even close to a contending team. If you aren't in it to win championships, than what is the point? Have you forgotten the Miami series? We couldn't even beat them when they were missing Chris Bosh, one of the top players in the NBA. That series was ours for the taking. We lost because they have two guys that can create their own shots consistently, we have zero.

Heisenberg
11-20-2012, 02:55 AM
I understand that we would be a better team with Granger, but not even close to a contending team. If you aren't in it to win championships, than what is the point? Have you forgotten the Miami series? We couldn't even beat them when they were missing Chris Bosh, one of the top players in the NBA. That series was ours for the taking. We lost because they have two guys that can create their own shots consistently, we have zero.
Then don't watch the rest of the year. Or probably the next 2+. It'll end in nothing but frustration for you. This team's not getting blown up.

presto123
11-20-2012, 03:08 AM
Just like always there are no easy answers with the Pacers. The answer at this stage is obviously not to blow up the team but Pacergeek does make a point. I have wondered for years why the Pacers hardly ever go after the more athletic, quicker players who can easily get their own shot. We get killed when we play teams like this. Paul George should be in this category but for whatever reason he's just not. I like Vogel a lot but I think a new head coach(and maybe FO) may be a necessity in the near future if for any other reason that it is time for a philosophy change. The team out-performed their ceiling last year and I do give them credit but that's definitely as far as you will get without some shot creators and shooters.

D-BONE
11-20-2012, 05:19 AM
Needs:

- Legit starting - caliber pg
- Legit perimeter sharpshooter
- Legit breakdown D off dribble threat

These needs have been the same essentially throughout the Bird 3 year plan or 5 year plan or perhaps soon to be 7 year plan or whatever the hell it was then / is now. Bird did upgrade the interior starters, that's his main success area, IMO.

Yet neither he nor anyone else involved in recent history has been able to meet any of these ongoing need areas, despite whatever efforts were made. I get that this isn't easy and these guys don't grow on trees, but it is what it is. Of course, additionally there has been the inability, whatever the reason, to add the level of talent player at any position that take our overall level up a notch.

Seemingly, PG and Lance are the most likely candidates to grow into one of the roles of need. While they're both young, the mental toughness to undertake that responsibility is enormous, and it's highly uncertain either of them can develop it.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 08:56 AM
We cannot survive another 4 year run of losing, which is where this group is headed.

No, that's not where this group is headed. This group is headed to more wins when DG gets back just like last season.

Are they heading to a championship? If PG does not step it up then chances are that no.

But they are headed towards consecutive good records and several playoff wins. Even if they don't bring a championship.



We suffered enough during the JOB years. This city needs a championship. We have waited long enough

Blowing it up will lead to a championship? It will only lead to another 2-3 years of losing.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 09:06 AM
We lost because they have two guys that can create their own shots consistently, we have zero.

However, you have to remember that it took some godlike performances by LeBron and Wade to get past us.

Are they going to replice those performances year after year?

naptownmenace
11-20-2012, 09:14 AM
Blowing it up will lead to a championship? It will only lead to another 2-3 years of losing.

So true. Look at the Cavs and Denver as the prime examples.

They were terrible, scored some major players in the lottery in LeBron and Carmelo and looked like they were on their way to the top. After 6 years of failing to make it to the Finals in Denver, Melo was asking for a trade to New York and LeBron was working on his exit strategy from the Cavs.

Another good example of what happens when you blow a team up is the team that the Pacers beat last night. Remember when the Wizards were a Playoff team with Arenas, Jamison, and Caron Butler? They broke that team up, stunk their way to multiple lottery picks including the #1 prize John Wall and they are 0-9.

That's what you have to look forward to when you blow a team up and start over. Be careful what you ask for.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 09:41 AM
So true. Look at the Cavs and Denver as the prime examples.

They were terrible, scored some major players in the lottery in LeBron and Carmelo and looked like they were on their way to the top. After 6 years of failing to make it to the Finals in Denver, Melo was asking for a trade to New York and LeBron was working on his exit strategy from the Cavs.

Another good example of what happens when you blow a team up is the team that the Pacers beat last night. Remember when the Wizards were a Playoff team with Arenas, Jamison, and Caron Butler? They broke that team up, picked us stunk their way to multiple lottery picks including the #1 prize John Wall and they are 0-9.

That's what you have to look forward to when you blow a team up and start over. Be careful what you ask for.

I wouldn't use Denver and Cleveland to make the point you are trying to make if I were you.

Ace E.Anderson
11-20-2012, 10:04 AM
Blowing it up and tweaking the roster are two very different things. Right now I'd say the Pacers have a good mix of players that would prefer to play a grind it out/slow it down tempo, and a mix of players that would be better suited for an open court, faster paced tempo. When we had DG, we had a better ability to adjust and play a mixture of the two styles, but with him out, and us lacking a true perimeter threat, we lack the ability to do both efficiently.

We don't know the extent of Danny's injury, but if there's a good chance that he won't be the Danny we've grown accustomed to seeing, then we HAVE to adapt to the trends of the rest of the league. Teams are not only getting smaller, quicker, and more athletic, but they're surrounding the ball handler's with shooters on the outside, and athletic finishers on the inside. I feel like we are one of the few teams in the league that lack the ability to play "small ball" effectively for any extended period of time.

If we're no longer going to be able to utilize our "size" as an advantage over teams that utilize this small ball approach, then we need to make a move to be able to match the small ball approach.

jtroub8
11-20-2012, 10:33 AM
Let's trade all the players on the roster who don't have the "it" factor. The earlier post of not needing rebounding at the 2 spot is correct cuz Hib's & West are just gobbling them up!

Sorry but I'll take 14 & 8 a game out of my SF with rock solid D! Sorry PG but at the ripe age of 22 there is no more room for improvement, when your 28 your game will be exactly how it is now, you might as well hang em up.

naptownmenace
11-20-2012, 10:47 AM
I wouldn't use Denver and Cleveland to make the point you are trying to make if I were you.

I wish you would elaborate. I think they are good examples of what could happen - the good and the bad.

I could use the Sacramento Kings instead. They traded off Doug Christie, Peja, Bibby,and Webber. They haven't been any good despite year after year drafting near the top of the lottery.

Trophy
11-20-2012, 10:51 AM
Blow up the roster and then...? :50cent:

Some of these posts are really sounding ridiculous. Sounds like a :panic: to me.

Ace E.Anderson
11-20-2012, 10:53 AM
Let's trade all the players on the roster who don't have the "it" factor. The earlier post of not needing rebounding at the 2 spot is correct cuz Hib's & West are just gobbling them up!

Sorry but I'll take 14 & 8 a game out of my SF with rock solid D! Sorry PG but at the ripe age of 22 there is no more room for improvement, when your 28 your game will be exactly how it is now, you might as well hang em up.

In spite of you trying to be sarcastic, I don't think anybody is saying that.

xIndyFan
11-20-2012, 11:01 AM
I wish you would elaborate. I think they are good examples of what could happen - the good and the bad.

I could use the Sacramento Kings instead. They traded off Doug Christie, Peja, Bibby,and Webber. They haven't been any good despite year after year drafting near the top of the lottery.


:iagree: blowing a team up and sucking works if you get lucky. lucky to get the high lottery pick. lucky to get bad in a year when a star player is available and lucky for that player to actually get good. Then you need to be lucky again the same way. and then you need to be lucky again the same way. That way you get you big three. OKC did it, but that just proves it can be done. Not that it is a strategy for success.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 11:03 AM
I wish you would elaborate. I think they are good examples of what could happen - the good and the bad.

Cleveland and Denver are not a good example because they blew it all up and are doing a pretty good job in rebuilding, those two teams should be in the playoffs this year, not only that but they have good enough young pieces to have a better future that a "non blowing it up" team like the Pacers.



I could use the Sacramento Kings instead. They traded off Doug Christie, Peja, Bibby,and Webber. They haven't been any good despite year after year drafting near the top of the lottery.

They had to trade all those old guys they had no choice, yes they suck but it has to do more with their front office and owners than anything else, just because a team sucks at drafting high doesn't mean that you are also going to suck at drafting high.

bunt
11-20-2012, 11:21 AM
I understand that we would be a better team with Granger, but not even close to a contending team. If you aren't in it to win championships, than what is the point? Have you forgotten the Miami series? We couldn't even beat them when they were missing Chris Bosh, one of the top players in the NBA. That series was ours for the taking. We lost because they have two guys that can create their own shots consistently, we have zero.

You're the same poster who expects the Colts to be a Super Bowl contender this year right? Me thinks if the Pacers were to go on a little run and win 8 out of 10, 12 out of 15, you'll be starting another thread changing your tune. You're either way too high or way too low.

And what's the blue print for blowing this team up? Are they to bottom out and have no long term commitments and finish the season with scrubs and the worst record? And then what? Hope there's a Lebron James, or Kyrie Irving, or Anthony Davis to pick? Because what happens if the best they can end up with is Derrick Williams? Or Brandon Knight? Evan Turner? Wes Johnson? What player can the Pacers trade to get the kind of haul that the Nuggets got for Carmelo?

Yeah if it was so easy to blow the team up and be guaranteed of drafting the next superstar who wouldn't want to do that? I love people pointing to the Nuggets (Carmelo) and the Cavs (Kyrie) and they say, "See, look how easy it is, the Pacers are so stupid!!" But they don't ever seem to mention the Kings, Bobcats, Wizards, or Raptors, who seemingly have tried this strategy for years on end and don't have much to show for it.

WhoLovesYaBaby?
11-20-2012, 11:23 AM
ok i'm clearly not talking to you becasue you obviously don't have the ability to understand. people exactly react the way you do when they simply don't understand.

Someone has been hitting the Jim Beam at 0221AM.

WhoLovesYaBaby?
11-20-2012, 11:26 AM
There is little point to this kind of thread. The Pacers are not going to trade Hill, George, or Hibbert. They might trade an expiring contract eventually.

This team will not be blown up, so why discuss it?

xIndyFan
11-20-2012, 11:36 AM
Someone has been hitting the Jim Beam at 0221AM.

before you get rude, take a look at xtacy's location. pretty sure it's not 2:21 am in turkey. Plus, iirc, not much drinking goes on in Turkey. It is an Islamic country so it's a good bet that xtacy doesn't drink.

Speed
11-20-2012, 11:39 AM
It's like we didn't just win a game with our max player finally playing great. Not even a hint of optimism.

Yeah, 11 games in, Roy has a good game and they barely beat what may be the worse team in the league!

Or maybe that was sarcasm...

Cousy47
11-20-2012, 11:54 AM
This. Herb Simon is a real estate and business man. The majority of owners in the NBA are not hands on basketball guys. They have other businesses to run. Do you think Herb Simon's major income stream comes from the Pacers? IMO, the only restriction he has ever put on his management team is "no LT". Bird said he and Herb had commited to around 64 million for this team. The end results is closer to 69 million iirc. This is and has not been a really restrited ownership especiallly when you own one of the lowest attended teams in the league. If Simon didn't love the Pacers and the City, this team would have been sold years ago. Simon should have sold the team after the 60+ win season when it's value was probably at it's highest. JMHO.

J7F
11-20-2012, 02:34 PM
Buying high and selling low is never prudent...

jtroub8
11-20-2012, 02:56 PM
In spite of you trying to be sarcastic, I don't think anybody is saying that.

Yes I was being sarcastic & working on my form lol. Yes some people are saying that, hence the reason for my sarcasm.

jtroub8
11-20-2012, 03:00 PM
I think if we were to trade anyone it should be Paul George. Unfortunately, I think most of us can agree, he doesn't have "it".


Just so you didnt think I was grabbing stuff out of my arse, Ace :buddies:

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2012, 03:09 PM
I so wish we could vote some "fans" off the island and ban them from returning when the team turns things around. I'm not against criticism and I'm often pretty critical myself, but every year we have "blow it up" and "tank away" and a bunch of other 19 year old lost puppy love reactions of "I'll never love again, you don't know my pain".

Some people just need to avoid posting mid-game right when things are sour. Other people just seem beyond hope. The team has come out of the gate clunky, but the players don't look specifically untalented and nearly all of them have played better in prior seasons.


It's been a lot of bad teams, but it's also been MORE ROAD GAMES THAN ANY TEAM has played. So maybe we are misreading some aspects, maybe we are underestimating chemistry issues or the loss of Danny.

The point is that it's insanely too soon to start talking about tearing the whole team apart. Frank is the closest to the hot seat and even he deserves time to figure things out. He's only in trouble if the team goes off into the ditch. They've threatened to do so, but so far they've kept a couple of wheels on the road which means he should continue to have a shot to get things on track.

Ace E.Anderson
11-20-2012, 03:09 PM
Just so you didnt think I was grabbing stuff out of my arse, Ace :buddies:

May the sarcasm continue!

naptownmenace
11-20-2012, 03:12 PM
Cleveland and Denver are not a good example because they blew it all up and are doing a pretty good job in rebuilding, those two teams should be in the playoffs this year, not only that but they have good enough young pieces to have a better future that a "non blowing it up" team like the Pacers.

Cleveland's not going to make the Playoffs this year. They're definitely another year away. They have way too many young players that lack experience to pull out enough close games to finish around .500 - especially with Kyrie breaking his finger yesterday. Denver's done a good job of making lemonade out of lemons but their situation is not anything I'd wish for the Pacers. They definitely aren't contenders.

The point I was making is that even if the lottery balls bounce your way, your team has to first be one of the worst teams in the league, second hope to wind up with superstar instead of a Darko or Marvin Williams, third try to build a team around that superstar to turn the team from a loser to a contender, and finally worry about keeping said superstar player when his contract is up.

That recipe fails more often than it succeeds.



They had to trade all those old guys they had no choice, yes they suck but it has to do more with their front office and owners than anything else, just because a team sucks at drafting high doesn't mean that you are also going to suck at drafting high.

That's the norm unfortunately. Even the Knicks when they blew up their team by trading Ewing and the Bulls post MJ and Pippen had several runs at the top lottery picks and they had several of their picks blow up in their faces. A lot of the guys they drafted looked like studs and turned out to be straight up duds.

I'm down with the Pacers trading one or maybe even 2 of their players to get a proven scorer added to the roster but I'm not interested in adding a bunch of youngs that might or might not pan out. I'm convinced that you only win a championship with team lead by All-Star veteran players. The draft is a crap shoot and this year's draft looks very iffy. I'd rather try to sign or trade for someone else's All-Star if we're going to make a trade right now. If not, you might as well play this season out and make any necessary changes in the offseason.

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2012, 03:13 PM
Also "Blow It Up" is NOT A PLAN, it's just some jack*** thing to say that doesn't even mean the same thing to everyone that agrees with it. Pacergeek would do one trade, Vnzla would do the opposite, and so on. Almost no one would break it apart and rebuild it the same way, no one would agree on keeping Frank or dumping him, who is replacing him or even which player to draft.


Not to mention that if this team gets it turned around (and maybe they won't) I don't expect too many people agreeing with the blow it up to loudly start threads saying "I sure was stupid about that blowing it up thing".

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 03:27 PM
If by "turning things around" you mean from been in the lottery to make it as the 8th or 7th seat then yeah you are right, hopefully next year they bring the same people back because they need another year together to figure things out.

Peck
11-20-2012, 03:32 PM
I realize that threads like this tend to be annoying over a long season but I think right now people want to vent & don't really mean blow it all up. If we all were reasonable & patient it would be a very boring forum.

Yes it's to early for this type of actual thinking but it's not to early to be concerned.

Drewtone
11-20-2012, 03:38 PM
If the Pacers didn't move when Britton Johnson was in the starting lineup, it's not moving now. It's November people. Adjustments will be made and things are likely to change.

Wait, what?????

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2012, 03:41 PM
That's the norm unfortunately. Even the Knicks when they blew up their team by trading Ewing and the Bulls post MJ and Pippen had several runs at the top lottery picks and they had several of their picks blow up in their faces. A lot of the guys they drafted looked like studs and turned out to be straight up duds.
Not only that, but the logical fallacy comes from people always recalling anecdotal version of what a great situation those teams were in, and then when it fails they just forget about that part and focus on the new "bad team". And then when someone does win that's also all they focus on.

It's like seeing a Powerball winner and saying "see, it works, that's how you get rich" instead of sitting in the depressing parking lot of a gas station watching lottery loser after lottery loser walk out with dud tickets.

Cap space and Player to be Named Later never won a title. The Pacers cleared cap and got what they wanted - West, a FA that is paying off in spades. They turned one draft pick into a solid starting guard, had 3 great drafts to add Roy, Granger and Paul, doing much better than many teams drafting before them.

Just what is the team going to do with the new picks and cap space they get. Sign another variation of West, draft more Paul's and Danny's. Risk getting Cole Aldrich instead of Roy Hibbert?

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 03:52 PM
Not only that, but the logical fallacy comes from people always recalling anecdotal version of what a great situation those teams were in, and then when it fails they just forget about that part and focus on the new "bad team". And then when someone does win that's also all they focus on.

It's like seeing a Powerball winner and saying "see, it works, that's how you get rich" instead of sitting in the depressing parking lot of a gas station watching lottery loser after lottery loser walk out with dud tickets.

Cap space and Player to be Named Later never won a title. The Pacers cleared cap and got what they wanted - West, a FA that is paying off in spades. They turned one draft pick into a solid starting guard, had 3 great drafts to add Roy, Granger and Paul, doing much better than many teams drafting before them.

Just what is the team going to do with the new picks and cap space they get. Sign another variation of West, draft more Paul's and Danny's. Risk getting Cole Aldrich instead of Roy Hibbert?

Aren't you the same person that was talking s*** about Larry's draft? now you are saying that he has been drafting well? I want to know what you are drinking or smoking.........

"The Pacers cleared the cap and got what they wanted"? really? this was the master plan?


And don't worry to get off the high horse to answers my questions either.

bunt
11-20-2012, 04:06 PM
Aren't you the same person that was talking s*** about Larry's draft? now you are saying that he has been drafting well? I want to know what you are drinking or smoking.........

"The Pacers cleared the cap and got what they wanted"? really? this was the master plan?


And don't worry to get off of the high horse to answers my questions either.

And what's your plan? Bottom out and cross our fingers for a number 1 pick and a franchise player? Or are you just going to continue to point out every deficiency or bad move and not offer any alternative?

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 04:28 PM
And what's your plan? Bottom out and cross our fingers for a number 1 pick and a franchise player? Or are you just going to continue to point out every deficiency or bad move and not offer any alternative?

My plan is not to blow it up but use some of the assets the Pacers have to bring pieces that are going to be here for the future when Hill, Roy and Paul George are in their prime, for example letting West expire and get nothing in return is stupid.

I think you can make some trades and still make the playoffs, the point is to build for the future not for the now, keeping this team intact is only going to get the Pacers as far as the first round, what is the point?

Keeping Seth's man crush in "BAMF" and Danny for as long as he want all is going to do is prolong the rebuilding process 3 or 4 years down the road, now if the goal is to be happy just to make it to the playoffs then lets just go ahead and celebrate and I'm sorry for expecting more out of the team.

aaronb
11-20-2012, 04:30 PM
Is this really what all the waiting around and clearing cap space was for? It was exactly what I was worried about and got flamed for a couple of years ago. Why stand pat and wait out contracts if all you plan on doing with the cap space is resigning your own players.

This team is stuck in the same no mans land that it was 5-6 years ago.

Not good enough to win...Not bad enough to get any real help...Not enough cap room to make any quick fixes.

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2012, 04:57 PM
I realize that threads like this tend to be annoying over a long season but I think right now people want to vent & don't really mean blow it all up. If we all were reasonable & patient it would be a very boring forum.

Yes it's to early for this type of actual thinking but it's not to early to be concerned.
When the hell did you become Mr. Reasonable. ;)



Keeping Seth's man crush in "BAMF" and Danny for as long as he want all is going to do is prolong the rebuilding process 3 or 4 years down the road,
But BAMF is what you try to get to complete a rebuild, which is what they just got done doing last season. There is no process to prolong because the rebuild is over. This is the era of tweeking OR the era in which Bird's rebuild turns out to be horrible - ie, when Larry walked away they had the 5 starters he assembled plus Lance, Tyler and Plumlee, his guys and the end of the 3 year plan.

Now just a couple of months later it's time to start the rebuild? So each rebuild gets a month to evaluate and then you tear it apart again and start a new 3 year plan? It's such bunk, it sounds like NBA2K thinking where you can make a million deals per hour and hit reset when you don't like it.

It's like moving Mark Jackson for Jalen Rose to fix the broken team that lost in round 1 the year before (when Reggie missed 4 games with a busted eye). That worked out great. By the end of the year Brown was fired and Jax was already brought back in a trade...and then they went on another 3 year tear that proved that they in fact did not need to be blown up in the least.

Naptown_Seth
11-20-2012, 05:09 PM
Aren't you the same person that was talking s*** about Larry's draft? now you are saying that he has been drafting well? I want to know what you are drinking or smoking.........

"The Pacers cleared the cap and got what they wanted"? really? this was the master plan?


And don't worry to get off the high horse to answers my questions either.
What I'm saying is either this isn't time to rebuild or people are saying Larry F'd it all up. Maybe your stance is that Larry built a crap team.

Granger at 17, Roy at 17 and Paul at 10 were all good picks. West was perhaps the best FA signed when you look at dollars vs production and intangibles. Hill was a smart trade when you didn't need Leonard due to Paul. Roy was coming off an AS season and half of PD said it was obvious that you bring him back and another 30% were saying "it's close but maybe you gotta do it despite the risk".


I mean what was the offseason going to be? Hibbert walks and they pay Kaman? After seeing Dallas, no thanks, and I had interest at the time. Overpay some lesser center, maybe make Mahinmi the cheap starter.

It's time to dance with who we brought, even if it's starting rough. It's just so incredibly knee-jerk, and this is coming from someone that finds the offense unwatchable at times.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 05:15 PM
When the hell did you become Mr. Reasonable. ;)



But BAMF is what you try to get to complete a rebuild, which is what they just got done doing last season. There is no process to prolong because the rebuild is over. This is the era of tweeking OR the era in which Bird's rebuild turns out to be horrible - ie, when Larry walked away they had the 5 starters he assembled plus Lance, Tyler and Plumlee, his guys and the end of the 3 year plan.

Now just a couple of months later it's time to start the rebuild? So each rebuild gets a month to evaluate and then you tear it apart again and start a new 3 year plan? It's such bunk, it sounds like NBA2K thinking where you can make a million deals per hour and hit reset when you don't like it.

It's like moving Mark Jackson for Jalen Rose to fix the broken team that lost in round 1 the year before (when Reggie missed 4 games with a busted eye). That worked out great. By the end of the year Brown was fired and Jax was already brought back in a trade...and then they went on another 3 year tear that proved that they in fact did not need to be blown up in the least.

If you think the rebuild is complete I don't know what to tell you.

naptownmenace
11-20-2012, 05:21 PM
My plan is not to blow it up but use some of the assets the Pacers have to bring pieces that are going to be here for the future when Hill, Roy and Paul George are in their prime, for example letting West expire and get nothing in return is stupid.

I think you can make some trades and still make the playoffs, the point is to build for the future not for the now, keeping this team intact is only going to get the Pacers as far as the first round, what is the point?

That makes sense and that is not the same as blowing the team up. Props for spelling that out and clearing up what you mean.

I have no idea what you could get for David though. I'm not opposed to the idea later on in the season closer to the trade deadline but you know that the player you get in return is probably going to be 50-75% as good as David West. I guess draft picks would be more or less the best part of the deal if you're building for the future. It's hard to get excited about that.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 05:24 PM
What I'm saying is either this isn't time to rebuild or people are saying Larry F'd it all up. Maybe your stance is that Larry built a crap team.

I think he build a team of mediocre players.


Granger at 17, Roy at 17 and Paul at 10 were all good picks. West was perhaps the best FA signed when you look at dollars vs production and intangibles. Hill was a smart trade when you didn't need Leonard due to Paul. Roy was coming off an AS season and half of PD said it was obvious that you bring him back and another 30% were saying "it's close but maybe you gotta do it despite the risk".

Yes I was happy with the Hill trade, I don't like his contract but I can live with it, Hill, Roy and Paul George are the only players I would keep if I was the Pacers.



I mean what was the offseason going to be? Hibbert walks and they pay Kaman? After seeing Dallas, no thanks, and I had interest at the time. Overpay some lesser center, maybe make Mahinmi the cheap starter.

Kaman was not the answer, as a backup? yes, as an starter? nope.


It's time to dance with who we brought, even if it's starting rough. It's just so incredibly knee-jerk, and this is coming from someone that finds the offense unwatchable at times.

Well there is no option but to watch this crappy team play, their options are limited because they decided to spend all their money in two of their players plus a bunch of scrubs with two of them getting long term contracts.

In reality the only assets they have are West and Paul George, and the more this team sucks the bigger chance there is for your man crush to sign somewhere else and then once again the Pacers lose a player for nothing, unless they make a deal with a team for a second round or something.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 05:46 PM
That makes sense and that is not the same as blowing the team up. Props for spelling that out and clearing up what you mean.

I have no idea what you could get for David though. I'm not opposed to the idea later on in the season closer to the trade deadline but you know that the player you get in return is probably going to be 50-75% as good as David West. I guess draft picks would be more or less the best part of the deal if you're building for the future. It's hard to get excited about that.

I think you can get some packages for West from contending teams, here are some EXAMPLES:

West+ Ian to OKC for Perkins+ Lamb+ pick.

West+Ian to Boston for Bass+ Sullinger+pick.

West+ Green to Brooklyn for Brooks+ Humpries.

West+ Green to Orlando for Big Baby+ Redick.

West+ Ian+ pick to GS for David Lee+ Jarret Jack

West to Houston for Morris+pick.

West+ Ian to SA for Splitter+ Blair

This are some examples by looking at other teams.

Pacergeek
11-20-2012, 06:10 PM
I realize that threads like this tend to be annoying over a long season but I think right now people want to vent & don't really mean blow it all up. If we all were reasonable & patient it would be a very boring forum.

Yes it's to early for this type of actual thinking but it's not to early to be concerned.

I really do want the team blown up. Take the emotional attachment we have to our current players out of the equation. The rebuild makes sense. If granger comes back healthy, the ceiling for this season is a 7th seed in the ECF. This is a step back from last year. We are trending downwards with this group.

jeffg-body
11-20-2012, 06:19 PM
I just find it amusing that people say we should blow it up after a small picture of games without our best player. Heck we lost several games right at the end that we should have won. If we can stay around .500 until Danny returns I think we will be ok.

Ownagedood
11-20-2012, 06:24 PM
The only thing I'd be interested in doing trade wise is putting our assets together to trade for a superstar. That's what I want us to do. Blue collar Gold swagger is cool but it will never win you a championship when other teams have 2 and 3 stars on their team and you have none. It just wont happen unfortunately.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 07:10 PM
keeping this team intact is only going to get the Pacers as far as the first round


So, you don't think that this team can repeat last year's performance and possibly expand on it?

MagicRat
11-20-2012, 07:15 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/AfX_oDzOxsc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 07:22 PM
So, you don't think that this team can repeat last year's performance and possibly expand on it?

Nope, this team is barely going to make it to the playoffs, they can't compete with NY,Miami,Brooklyn and Boston, first round exit with or without Danny.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 07:24 PM
If granger comes back healthy, the ceiling for this season is a 7th seed in the ECF. This is a step back from last year. We are trending downwards with this group.

Why the ceiling is the 7th seed? I'd really like you to explain your reasoning.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 07:26 PM
Nope, this team is barely going to make it to the playoffs, they can't compete with NY,Miami,Brooklyn and Boston, first round exit with or without Danny.

They could compete last season. What exactly changed?

Yes, both the Knicks and the Nets improved. But we were significantly better than them last season. There's no reason to believe that once Danny is back we cannot compete against them.

Eleazar
11-20-2012, 08:02 PM
They could compete last season. What exactly changed?

Yes, both the Knicks and the Nets improved. But we were significantly better than them last season. There's no reason to believe that once Danny is back we cannot compete against them.

Don't forget you are talking to people who believe last season was a fluke.

Constellations
11-20-2012, 08:07 PM
This thread needs blown up.

Cactus Jax
11-20-2012, 08:09 PM
Don't forget you are talking to people who believe last season was a fluke.

It was a little bit of a fluke, the Pacers had remarkable health the whole season, and the players were together and in good shape, unlike a lot of players and teams.

Eleazar
11-20-2012, 08:24 PM
It was a little bit of a fluke, the Pacers had remarkable health the whole season, and the players were together and in good shape, unlike a lot of players and teams.

What do injuries have to do with anything other than win-loss record? They played as well as they did because they were that good. Less injuries might have equaled a few more wins, but I am not judging them based on wins but based on how they played.

presto123
11-20-2012, 08:40 PM
They could compete last season. What exactly changed?

Yes, both the Knicks and the Nets improved. But we were significantly better than them last season. There's no reason to believe that once Danny is back we cannot compete against them.


Well for one thing the team chemistry and energy changed big time. Count discount that. Better on paper doesn't mean better on the floor. The off-season has been a disaster so far. How many games do we need to give the new players before they start coming around?

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 08:44 PM
It was a little bit of a fluke, the Pacers had remarkable health the whole season, and the players were together and in good shape, unlike a lot of players and teams.

Teams are not supposed to be injured all the time. Yes, injuries do happen but good health is supposed to be the norm when a team's medical staff is not entirely inept.

You can say that it was a fluke that several Eastern teams had serious injuries on some key players. With this, I can agree. But the Pacers' own good health was not a fluke. It's something that's supposed to happen more often than injuries.

Pacergeek
11-20-2012, 08:48 PM
So, you don't think that this team can repeat last year's performance and possibly expand on it?

I really don't think so. I would love to be optimistic, but I truly believe that last years team overachieved. You need at least two players that can get the ball and score regardless of the defense. The Pacers have zero. Last season, our "win as a team" strategy paid dividends. I don't know if the rest of the NBA figured us out, or whatever excuse you want me to make. The bottom line is that our overall talent level did not improve since last year. The only player that improved is Lance Stephenson. Basically, our FO gambled that Paul George and Roy Hibbert would take it to the next level, and they lost.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 08:50 PM
Well for one thing the team chemistry and energy changed big time. Count discount that. Better on paper doesn't mean better on the floor. The off-season has been a disaster so far.

I agree that we had an amazing chemistry last year. I always loved it and considered it a great part of our success.

But that's not something that we cannot replicate again this year. The starters didn't change. The chemistry is mostly there. That's the point of continuation.

When the bench finds some chemistry then the overall chemistry and energy levels of the team will resemble last year's.



How many games do we need to give the new players before they start coming around?

Personally, I'm willing to give them as long as it takes. But that's just me :)

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 08:51 PM
They could compete last season. What exactly changed?

No Danny, worse bench, Roy sucking, teams getting better and actually upgrading.


Yes, both the Knicks and the Nets improved. But we were significantly better than them last season.

People don't want to hear it but NY and Brooklyn had a lot things happening to them last year reason why the Pacers were better than them, Amare out, Melo out of shape and injured, Brook Lopez out, Deron got hurt, coaching changes in NY, etc.


There's no reason to believe that once Danny is back we cannot compete against them.

There are many reasons to believe that Danny is not coming back this year and even if he does there are many reasons to believe that he is not going to be healthy enough to make a difference, there are also reasons to believe that he is never going to be the same Danny ever again, so hoping for Danny to come back and fix everything is just a dream.

Pacergeek
11-20-2012, 08:53 PM
Why the ceiling is the 7th seed? I'd really like you to explain your reasoning.

I love your optimism, but the reality is that the NBA is a superstar-driven league. We don't have any. What happened last year was not a good blueprint for the future success of the Pacers. Our best player right now is arguably David West, who is probably a top 15-20 player in the east. That's not going to get it done

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 08:59 PM
I really don't think so. I would love to be optimistic, but I truly believe that last years team overachieved.

There are two ways to approach this issue.

#1 way: This year's team is underachieving.

#2 way: Last year's team was overachieving.

Given that our best player is missing and we have a brand new bench that has still to find any chemistry or rhythm I'm much more inclined towards the 1st option.

It's the most logical assumption imo but in general I'm a glass half full kind of person.

Hicks
11-20-2012, 09:02 PM
When our opponents have injuries to key players, it means we couldn't have won otherwise. When we have a key injury, it doesn't matter because with or without it we have the same low ceiling. Of course. :)

Pacergeek
11-20-2012, 09:02 PM
There are two ways to approach this issue.

#1 way: This year's team is underachieving.

#2 way: Last year's team was overachieving.

Given that our best player is missing and we have a brand new bench that has still to find any chemistry or rhythm I'm much more inclined towards the 1st option.

It's the most logical assumption imo but in general I'm a glass half full kind of person.

I really hope you are correct with option 1

Eleazar
11-20-2012, 09:03 PM
I love your optimism, but the reality is that the NBA is a superstar-driven league. We don't have any. What happened last year was not a good blueprint for the future success of the Pacers. Our best player right now is arguably David West, who is probably a top 15-20 player in the east. That's not going to get it done

What happened last year was a young team in its first season together as a complete team showing they had a lot of promise. If we were a veteran team I doubt you see the Heat beat us.

Hicks
11-20-2012, 09:04 PM
As for blowing this team up, it's way too soon. Not too soon to imagine how one might do so when the time is right, but speculation only.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 09:05 PM
Teams are not supposed to be injured all the time. Yes, injuries do happen but good health is supposed to be the norm when a team's medical staff is not entirely inept.

You can say that it was a fluke that several Eastern teams had serious injuries on some key players. With this, I can agree. But the Pacers' own good health was not a fluke. It's something that's supposed to happen more often than injuries.

True but last year was one of those years were multiple stars got hurt opening the door for teams like the Pacers, Philly, Denver, etc, have you noticed that neither one of those teams look as good as they looked in the beginning of last year? it has been reported by many people that in short seasons young teams do pretty well, the same happened in the previous lockout.

Not only that but the Pacers were also doing something that many people didn't have an explanation for, they had a pretty good defense(like this year) and a horrible offense(like this year) and they were still able to win ugly games.

Hicks
11-20-2012, 09:06 PM
There are two ways to approach this issue.

#1 way: This year's team is underachieving.

#2 way: Last year's team was overachieving.

Given that our best player is missing and we have a brand new bench that has still to find any chemistry or rhythm I'm much more inclined towards the 1st option.

It's the most logical assumption imo but in general I'm a glass half full kind of person.

The logic doesn't even require optimism, really. A team with previous success/talent is struggling while its best player sits and practically everyone else is playing below their mean average. When you consider that, the choice seems pretty obvious, whether you tend to be optimistic, pessimistic, or indifferent.

Hicks
11-20-2012, 09:08 PM
Anyway, all of the above is my head talking. On an emotional level, when I have to watch some of the garbage ball they've been playing, I feel like I want them to leave the NBA and spare me this evil forever more.

Eleazar
11-20-2012, 09:08 PM
True but last year was one of those years were multiple stars got hurt opening the door for teams like the Pacers, Philly, Denver, etc, have you noticed that neither one of those teams look as good as they looked in the beginning of last year? it has been reported by many people that in short seasons young teams do pretty well, the same happened in the previous lockout.

Not only that but the Pacers were also doing something that many people didn't have an explanation for, they had a pretty good defense(like this year) and a horrible offense(like this year) and they were still able to win ugly games.

If our offense was as good as it was last year this team would have one of the best records in the league, and we most likely only have 2 or 3 losses.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 09:14 PM
There are two ways to approach this issue.

#1 way: This year's team is underachieving.

#2 way: Last year's team was overachieving.

Given that our best player is missing and we have a brand new bench that has still to find any chemistry or rhythm I'm much more inclined towards the 1st option.

It's the most logical assumption imo but in general I'm a glass half full kind of person.

Option 1 is keeping them in the lottery, option 3(they play a bit better) is going to keep them in 8th or 7th place.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 09:18 PM
No Danny, worse bench, Roy sucking, teams getting better and actually upgrading.

1) Danny will not be out for the whole season. If Danny is to be out for the whole season then you can feel free to overwrite most of the things I've said as wrong as I'm counting on Danny to be back on February as it has been stated.

2) The bench will not look like that for the whole season. Ian, Green, DJ and Young need some time to mesh together. It's almost an entirely new bench. You cannot expect results from day 1, imo.

3) Roy will not suck for the whole season. He has been in such slumps again only to emerge again as the Roy we all know and love (and sometimes even better).

4) I agree that teams like the Knicks and the Nets got better. But teams like the Hawks and the Bulls got slightly worse (granted, the Bulls mainly due to Rose's injury). Orlando got a lot worse and Philly is a wild card. If we played as good as we played last year we would have no problem to secure the Central. Of course, we're playing a lot worse than last year. Still, I have faith that we can turn this around and secure a 4th to 6th seed.



People don't want to hear it but NY and Brooklyn had a lot things happening to them last year reason why the Pacers were better than them, Amare out, Melo out of shape and injured, Brook Lopez out, Deron got hurt, coaching changes in NY, etc.

Please stop with the "people don't want to hear it" thing. It is annoying and untrue. People don't want to listen to exaggerations and overreactions. They have no problem listening to some actual facts.

1) Brook Lopez being out was a valid problem for the Nets. Shelden Williams is simply not a starter. Johan Petro is one of the worst big men that France ever produced. Their front court rotation (except Humphries) was brutal.

2) Deron getting hurt was a problem as well, of course. The Nets sucked last year for those simple and valid reasons. It makes absolute sense that they are good now.

3) Amare being out does not seem to be such a big problem for the Knicks now, does it? It never was. Amare is still not a good fit with Melo. They will never be a good fit.

4) Woodson is a lot better than D' Antoni for the Knicks. Their last season surge was not a fluke. This Knicks team is not bad at all. But with Danny we can still beat them. Just like we did last year.

Both the Knicks and the Nets are legit this season. But I have no reason to believe that they are any better than we were last year.



There are many reasons to believe that Danny is not coming back this year and even if he does there are many reasons to believe that he is not going to be healthy enough to make a difference, there are also reasons to believe that he is never going to be the same Danny ever again, so hoping for Danny to come back and fix everything is just a dream.

Then please explain those reasons to me.

vnzla81
11-20-2012, 09:18 PM
If our offense was as good as it was last year this team would have one of the best records in the league, and we most likely only have 2 or 3 losses.

Yeah I don't know about that, just so you know I can also play the IF game too, "IF Wall and Nene are healthy we don't win either games against Washington".....

Hicks
11-20-2012, 09:23 PM
Looking back on our games, I count up to four games we probably win with Danny, even with our warts. That would have us at 9-3, 3rd in the east. Gives me some perspective.

It's not that we don't have a lot of issues, it's that we're talented enough when healthy to win ugly versus bad and mediocre teams. Which would keep us afloat while we tighten things up. Instead, we've stepped over the threshold and lost those games, hence the crappy record.

In other words, this start is nauseating, but it's not that the team is dying. It's just got a stomach flu.

Eleazar
11-20-2012, 09:37 PM
You are right that having players back completely changes games, but that isn't something the Pacers can control and not really an accurate comparison. They can control how well they play on offense, and so far only two teams have outscored last years Pacers average in regulation.

bunt
11-20-2012, 09:43 PM
I love your optimism, but the reality is that the NBA is a superstar-driven league. We don't have any. What happened last year was not a good blueprint for the future success of the Pacers. Our best player right now is arguably David West, who is probably a top 15-20 player in the east. That's not going to get it done

So because the Pacers don't have a superstar, they should do what exactly? Hope one falls in their laps? Trade any or all the current players and bottom out and hope to draft one? If its so easy how do they do it?

The starters push the eventual NBA champs to six games, the team makes significant changes to the bench, and now 11 games in and 1 major injury later and all of a sudden they're not good enough. The run is over. They have no superstar so they should blow things up. A lot of you guys are as bad at talking basketball as the Pacers are playing right now.

Ace E.Anderson
11-20-2012, 09:45 PM
So the Pacers lucked out last season because many teams lost one of if not their best player? So does this mean that many teams THIS year are lucking out because the Pacers are without their best player? Does it not work this way?

I've been one of the ones that have advocated in flipping an asset or two in order to make our roster compliment eachother a little more. I'm a bit on the pessimistic side that Danny will come back in February, AND will be the Danny of old. No he never relied on athleticism or quickness, BUT knee injuries are brutal to come back from--and can often times be a chronic issue. We won't know until he comes back, but by the time he comes back, it will have been too late for us to realize what we need, and the opportunity to flip an asset or two for another scorer will have been lost.

With us having an elite defense thus far, we will have a chance in most games. And yes, most of our players are shooting at career low levels--so there is a chance for us to turn things around with our current group. I guess I'd just feel a lot more comfortable if we had at least one player who can put the ball in the basket. Not even at an elite, or even a stater level. Just someone who can consistently knock down open shots.

15th parallel
11-20-2012, 09:50 PM
Well to put another perspective, let's look at the Miami team on the first few games with their new players (James, Bosh, etc.). They were touted as champions in the offseason yet they "sucked" (they were still a little above 0.500) in their first 20+ games, including their bad loss to the "mediocre" Pacers. Yet after that they managed to recover and even became the #2 seed, eventually reaching the finals.

Now, I'm not saying that the current team will become like that, or that we're as strong as Miami that time. I'm just showing that early struggles are still recoverable, and they just need to pull themselves together. Hibbert is still struggling, but I believe he'll eventually recover his "all-star" self. George is struggling offensively, but he's still doing well on defense most of the time. I'm sure his shooting woes are more psychological. West and Hill cannot carry the game by themselves all the time, but they're doing what they can while their 2 struggling buddies are trying to figure things out. Lance is still adjusting too from EOB (end-of-the-bench) to starter role, so they'll make plays for him as he grows on the court. The new bench are struggling because they play together most of the time and there's not much chemistry yet, but I'm sure they'll solve their problems when they start playing more together.

Let's just relax and back off the legde for the meantime. The losses really hurt especially that we have played low-tier teams for the most part, but there are still a lot of games to play and anything can happen, not only on the Pacers but also on the 29 teams. Just look at last year's Boston, Chicago and Orlando at the start and at the end.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 09:59 PM
I love your optimism, but the reality is that the NBA is a superstar-driven league. We don't have any. What happened last year was not a good blueprint for the future success of the Pacers. Our best player right now is arguably David West, who is probably a top 15-20 player in the east. That's not going to get it done

In the end, it's still basketball. The NBA can be as much of a superstar-driven league as it wants. In the end the best team wins.

Miami wouldn't win last year if their role players didn't hit their open shots. It was LeBron and Wade that lead them to the championship but even them couldn't do it alone. They needed that contribution by the rest of their team because basketball is a team game.

SIR-LANCE-ALOT
11-20-2012, 10:20 PM
maybe the trailblazers still want hibbert, we'll take batum off their hands and lilliard

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 10:57 PM
True but last year was one of those years were multiple stars got hurt opening the door for teams like the Pacers, Philly, Denver, etc, have you noticed that neither one of those teams look as good as they looked in the beginning of last year? it has been reported by many people that in short seasons young teams do pretty well, the same happened in the previous lockout.

1) Philly shook up their line-up considerably. They traded Iguodala for Bynum. They also amnestied Elton Brand and let Lou Williams and Jodie Meeks walk. They replaced them with Dorrel Wright, Jason Richardson and Nick Young. That's a significant number of changes. Plus, Bynum is hurt and Kwame Brown is starting. You cannot expect them to replicate last year's performance as they need a lot of time to gel. This year's Sixers are not the same team with last year's Sixers.

2) Denver is not the same team either. They gave up some depth in Arron Afflalo and Al Harrington in order to trade for Andre Iguodala. Is it going to work? Who knows? It's still early to tell. They are not the same team as last year either.

So, as you can see out of the teams you mentioned it's only the Pacers that have maintained the same core as last year. The only problem is that our best player is injured. Which means that we're not the same team until he comes back.

Conclusion: The whole "young teams do pretty well on lock out seasons" narrative is just that. A narrative. It's not an actual fact.

However, you have every right to believe that it's true :)



Not only that but the Pacers were also doing something that many people didn't have an explanation for, they had a pretty good defense(like this year) and a horrible offense(like this year) and they were still able to win ugly games.

The offense was equally ugly but it wasn't as bad.

Wanna know the difference?

I'll focus on two important but often underestimated elements of the game. Free throws and turnovers. Let's compare last season to this season, shall we?

Percent of Points from FTs (last season): 20.7% (1st)

Percent of Points from FTs (this season): 19.0% (12nd)

Free Throw % (last season): 78.1% (5th)

Free Throw % (this season): 73.2% (24th)

FTMs (Free Throws made) per Game (last season): 20.1 (2nd)

FTMs per Game (this season): 16.8 (16th)

FTAs per Game (last season): 25.7 (3rd)

FTAs per Game (this season): 23.0 (17th)

FTA per FGA (last season): 0.316 (3rd)

FTA per FGA (this season): 0.286 (15th)

FTM per 100 Possessions (last season): 21.171 (2nd)

FTM per 100 Possessions (this season): 17.672 (18th)

FTA per Offensive Play (last season): 23.9% (2nd)

FTA per Offensive Play (this season): 21.3% (16th)

Turnovers per Game (last season): 14.2 (tied at 11th)

Turnovers per Game (this season): 16.9 (29th)

Turnovers per Possession (last season): 15.0% (tied at 12th)

Turnovers per Possession (this season): 17.8% (30th)

Turnovers per Offensive Play (last season): 13.2% (tied at 9th)

Turnovers per Offensive Play (this season): 15.7% (28th)

You can find all those stats here -> http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/team-stats/

Our offense last season wasn't pretty but it was effective. We were an elite team when it came to free throws and we were above average in taking care of the ball.

This season? We are a middle of the road team when it comes in free throws and one of the worst in taking care of the ball. Couple that with Danny's absence and Roy's below par play and one can easily explain why we look that bad.

Conclusion: You can have an effective offense even if it looks ugly as far as FG% and APG go, if you simply take care of the ball, go to the line often and hit your FTs. That's what we did last season. I have no reason to believe that we won't be able to do this again this season. It's vital for our success to improve in those areas and reach last year's standards.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 10:59 PM
The logic doesn't even require optimism, really. A team with previous success/talent is struggling while its best player sits and practically everyone else is playing below their mean average. When you consider that, the choice seems pretty obvious, whether you tend to be optimistic, pessimistic, or indifferent.

I agree but as I generally tend to be an optimistic person I felt the need to point it out in order for the logic to be as impartial as possible.

Nuntius
11-20-2012, 11:02 PM
Option 1 is keeping them in the lottery, option 3(they play a bit better) is going to keep them in 8th or 7th place.

Why? I didn't say that they are going to underachieve for the next 70 games ;)

There's plenty of time to turn this around and stop underachieving. If we do that, we can grab a quite good seed.

Peck
11-21-2012, 12:04 AM
Looking back on our games, I count up to four games we probably win with Danny, even with our warts. That would have us at 9-3, 3rd in the east. Gives me some perspective.

It's not that we don't have a lot of issues, it's that we're talented enough when healthy to win ugly versus bad and mediocre teams. Which would keep us afloat while we tighten things up. Instead, we've stepped over the threshold and lost those games, hence the crappy record.

In other words, this start is nauseating, but it's not that the team is dying. It's just got a stomach flu.

I tend to agree about the record & to be honest with you I feel Danny would have taken the Bucks game because as we all know Danny Gragner is Monta Ellis idol, lord and master. That part is for you know who which will be replying shortly. :)

However what concerns me is while it is painfully apperant Danny Granger is far better as a talent than even I thought what happens if he does not recover from this or if he is only 1/4 or even 1/2 the player he was? You know who will also be responding about this as well but there is some merit to this concern. This isn't inflamation or even an injury, this is a degeneration so I'm not sure what the recovery will be like.

But worst case scenario I think that it's painfully apperant that the team as structured would not be anything more than a midling first round and out team in the future.

Now of course when Danny returns riding the white horse and takes us to the second round from the 7th or 8th position & everyone has to finally bow to him (this is also for the benefit of you know who) we can pretend like this has just been a bad dream.

Heisenberg
11-21-2012, 04:05 AM
I don't know what'll happen when Danny comes back, but if we win like 70% of our games with him it's going to be awesome to see him get worshipped all around the internet. He's taken unneeded hate for years.

Hicks
11-21-2012, 09:41 AM
I tend to agree about the record & to be honest with you I feel Danny would have taken the Bucks game because as we all know Danny Gragner is Monta Ellis idol, lord and master. That part is for you know who which will be replying shortly. :)

However what concerns me is while it is painfully apperant Danny Granger is far better as a talent than even I thought what happens if he does not recover from this or if he is only 1/4 or even 1/2 the player he was? You know who will also be responding about this as well but there is some merit to this concern. This isn't inflamation or even an injury, this is a degeneration so I'm not sure what the recovery will be like.

But worst case scenario I think that it's painfully apperant that the team as structured would not be anything more than a midling first round and out team in the future.

Now of course when Danny returns riding the white horse and takes us to the second round from the 7th or 8th position & everyone has to finally bow to him (this is also for the benefit of you know who) we can pretend like this has just been a bad dream.

Is it degeneration? I thought what I had read said that it was something that takes a long time to get this bad and also takes about the same length of time of rest to feel better again. If rest can make it feel better, how can it be a degeneration? I thought degeneration meant something that is gone and that's it?

Heisenberg
11-21-2012, 09:55 AM
Is it degeneration? I thought what I had read said that it was something that takes a long time to get this bad and also takes about the same length of time of rest to feel better again. If rest can make it feel better, how can it be a degeneration? I thought degeneration meant something that is gone and that's it?

It does mean that. You're right in all those statements. Which is a BIG deal when Danny expires after next year. Danny's never going to be 26 year old Danny again. Old school and non-dependent on athleticism as his game may be it really doesn't matter, a "non-explosive" arsenal isn't the same as not being able to run. He makes it in the league to 35 he's going to be an off the bench spot shooter those last couple years in my opinion. That's what he'll be best suited for anyway.

We re-sign/extend Danny expecting him to be a core piece during that contract then it's a major mistake. For better or worse I hope we let Danny, who I like immensely, pursue greener pastures after this contract just because I don't think he'll be able to make the money worthwhile. It's one thing to gripe about a 26 year old 7'2 guy making a ton of money but at least he's (knock on wood) healthy as an ox and plays consistently outstanding rim defense and can give you a solid 15ppg a night, we'll see. Dumping a bunch of money into a 3rd contract for Danny would just be a bad investment in my opinion, and I love the guy. Unless it's really franchise friendly I'm fine with letting him walk.

Eleazar
11-21-2012, 09:56 AM
Is it degeneration? I thought what I had read said that it was something that takes a long time to get this bad and also takes about the same length of time of rest to feel better again. If rest can make it feel better, how can it be a degeneration? I thought degeneration meant something that is gone and that's it?

Yeah, I think he meant chronic, not degenerative.

Heisenberg
11-21-2012, 10:00 AM
Yeah, I think he meant chronic, not degenerative.

They're sort of the same thing when it comes to sports (a career is a short lifespan), but tendonosis is a degenerative problem. It's not really correctable, not while continuing a pro sports career.

Ace E.Anderson
11-21-2012, 10:22 AM
Is it degeneration? I thought what I had read said that it was something that takes a long time to get this bad and also takes about the same length of time of rest to feel better again. If rest can make it feel better, how can it be a degeneration? I thought degeneration meant something that is gone and that's it?

It's degeneration as it pertains to being able to keep up with he rigors of professional sports. This problem wont go away--within his pro career. Now later on in life, Danny will be able to walk just fine and lead a normal life. But as far as being able to jump, cut, etc--his knee issues will constantly be an issue. The 3 month timetable is so the swelling and pain can subside. Once he comes back, he'll be able to ice his knee in order to deal with the pain for the rest of the season. But moving forward, his knee will most likely always be a problem of some sort.

Ace E.Anderson
11-21-2012, 10:26 AM
It does mean that. You're right in all those statements. Which is a BIG deal when Danny expires after next year. Danny's never going to be 26 year old Danny again. Old school and non-dependent on athleticism as his game may be it really doesn't matter, a "non-explosive" arsenal isn't the same as not being able to run. He makes it in the league to 35 he's going to be an off the bench spot shooter those last couple years in my opinion. That's what he'll be best suited for anyway.

We re-sign/extend Danny expecting him to be a core piece during that contract then it's a major mistake. For better or worse I hope we let Danny, who I like immensely, pursue greener pastures after this contract just because I don't think he'll be able to make the money worthwhile. It's one thing to gripe about a 26 year old 7'2 guy making a ton of money but at least he's (knock on wood) healthy as an ox and plays consistently outstanding rim defense and can give you a solid 15ppg a night, we'll see. Dumping a bunch of money into a 3rd contract for Danny would just be a bad investment in my opinion, and I love the guy. Unless it's really franchise friendly I'm fine with letting him walk.

I've always thought Danny's career could evolve to what Rashard Lewis ended up being on ORL and now on MIA. A (excuse my language) stretch 4 who can play with a post player and simply knock down long 3's. If we could re-sign him for 6-8 Mil a yr with the idea that he'll be our 3rd-4th option offensively--I'd be willing to re-sign him. It just means we need to sign, trade for, or draft someone that can be good 1st and 2nd options as well.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 10:36 AM
Danny to me has been lucky to play this long, many teams passed on him in draft night because they never thought he was going to be able to play this long, I don't expect Danny to be Danny ever again but I hope I'm wrong.

And with that said the Pacers should start to make plans with life after Danny Granger, failing to do so is going to put this team in a whole for years to come.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 10:41 AM
I've always thought Danny's career could evolve to what Rashard Lewis ended up being on ORL and now on MIA. A (excuse my language) stretch 4 who can play with a post player and simply knock down long 3's. If we could re-sign him for 6-8 Mil a yr with the idea that he'll be our 3rd-4th option offensively--I'd be willing to re-sign him. It just means we need to sign, trade for, or draft someone that can be good 1st and 2nd options as well.

I always compared Danny to Rashard Lewis and people here gave me s*** for it, glad to know that somebody also think the same thing.

Ace E.Anderson
11-21-2012, 10:49 AM
I always compared Danny to Rashard Lewis and people here gave me s*** for it, glad to know that somebody also think the same thing.

Pre-ORL Rashard Lewis was a very very good player. He wasn't a superstar, but he was basically a taller and tad bit more athletic version of Danny.

Heisenberg
11-21-2012, 11:15 AM
I always compared Danny to Rashard Lewis and people here gave me s*** for it, glad to know that somebody also think the same thing.

you are the Great Carnac of NBA prognostication. when's the last time you were wrong? or is it always "well...I said so...once upon a time..because I said I said so...."

I've spent a ton of time on message boards, you're the single most negative "fan" I've ever seen, bay far

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 11:38 AM
you are the Great Carnac of NBA prognostication. when's the last time you were wrong? or is it always "well...I said so...once upon a time..because I said I said so...."

I've spent a ton of time on message boards, you're the single most negative "fan" I've ever seen, bay far

I don't know why are you going all crazy on me? forgot to eat your cereal or something? back off, I'm trying to have a good discussion here.

And yes I've been saying that Danny is like Rashard Lewis forever but for some reason people tought I was trashing him, so get your facts straight before you reply.

Edit: if you want to be proven wrong go ahead and ask majorcold I had many arguments with him regarding this.

Nuntius
11-21-2012, 11:54 AM
forgot to eat your cereal or something?

It's hard to eat cereals when you keep pissing on them ;)

Heisenberg
11-21-2012, 12:05 PM
I don't know why are you going all crazy on me? forgot to eat your cereal or something? back off, I'm trying to have a good discussion here.

And yes I've been saying that Danny is like Rashard Lewis forever but for some reason people tought I was trashing him, so get your facts straight before you reply.

Edit: if you want to be proven wrong go ahead and ask majorcold I had many arguments with him regarding this.I don't care, every single post you make is negative. I'm being serious, do you find no joy in watching basketball? You are the most negative message board personality I've ever seen.

BillS
11-21-2012, 12:08 PM
Now of course when Danny returns riding the white horse and takes us to the second round from the 7th or 8th position & everyone has to finally bow to him (this is also for the benefit of you know who) we can pretend like this has just been a bad dream.

Well, no, if this happens and we go out in the second round there will be cries to blow it up because we're "only" the Atlanta Hawks and getting to the second round two years in a row is proof we're not good enough.

Remember, Championship or abject suckage failure. No middle ground.

RLeWorm
11-21-2012, 12:15 PM
anybody else watching first take right now? Stephen A. said that Pau Gasol might be available. He said something along the lines like, "Don't be surprised if the Lakers are taking calls about Pau Gasol". We could send em West who would still be a good fit with Howard, and they would probably want someone else for their bench. Don't know who we would give up though(all of our bench players suck lol).

Nuntius
11-21-2012, 12:17 PM
We could send em West who would still be a good fit with Howard

He wouldn't be a good fit with Howard. He would clog the lane just as much as Pau does.

Pacergeek
11-21-2012, 12:19 PM
In the end, it's still basketball. The NBA can be as much of a superstar-driven league as it wants. In the end the best team wins.

Miami wouldn't win last year if their role players didn't hit their open shots. It was LeBron and Wade that lead them to the championship but even them couldn't do it alone. They needed that contribution by the rest of their team because basketball is a team game.

Miami played outstanding team defense. Offensively, it was only Wade and James. Superstars win championships. What makes that series painful, is that they beat us missing their 3rd superstar Bosh. That series was there for the taking, but we simply lacked the talent to get it done

Pacergeek
11-21-2012, 12:21 PM
Well, no, if this happens and we go out in the second round there will be cries to blow it up because we're "only" the Atlanta Hawks and getting to the second round two years in a row is proof we're not good enough.

Remember, Championship or abject suckage failure. No middle ground.

Not sure why anybody would be happy with another second round playoff exit. We, as fans, should have higher expectations

Sparhawk
11-21-2012, 12:29 PM
anybody else watching first take right now? Stephen A. said that Pau Gasol might be available. He said something along the lines like, "Don't be surprised if the Lakers are taking calls about Pau Gasol". We could send em West who would still be a good fit with Howard, and they would probably want someone else for their bench. Don't know who we would give up though(all of our bench players suck lol).

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=a25l22j

Pacer get:
Josh Smith

Lakers get:
David West
Kyle Korver

Hawks get:
Paul Gasol
Pendergraph (more of a throw in to make the trade work)

I'm sure there could be picks involved too, but I think this could be a very nice trade for all parties.

Since86
11-21-2012, 12:32 PM
There has been a rumor earlier this week that Atlanta turned down a Pau/Josh Smith swap. I'll see if I can find it.

BillS
11-21-2012, 12:32 PM
Not sure why anybody would be happy with another second round playoff exit. We, as fans, should have higher expectations

I rest my case.

Since86
11-21-2012, 12:33 PM
http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/11/17/report-hawks-not-interested-in-trading-josh-smith-for-pau-gasol/

Peck
11-21-2012, 12:41 PM
Not sure why anybody would be happy with another second round playoff exit. We, as fans, should have higher expectations

You have to take it in the context of which I said it. I said if we suck now but can stay within striking distance of the playoffs and then Danny returns we not only make the playoffs but go to the next round (meaning we beat a higher seed).

You wouldn't call that a success?

Sandman21
11-21-2012, 12:42 PM
anybody else watching first take right now? Stephen A. said that Pau Gasol might be available. He said something along the lines like, "Don't be surprised if the Lakers are taking calls about Pau Gasol". We could send em West who would still be a good fit with Howard, and they would probably want someone else for their bench. Don't know who we would give up though(all of our bench players suck lol).
And then Pau would come here and sulk because Indianapolis doesn't have enough "culture" for him.

Pass.

Ace E.Anderson
11-21-2012, 12:52 PM
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=a25l22j

Pacer get:
Josh Smith

Lakers get:
David West
Kyle Korver

Hawks get:
Paul Gasol
Pendergraph (more of a throw in to make the trade work)

I'm sure there could be picks involved too, but I think this could be a very nice trade for all parties.

Idk why the Lakers would want West outside of the fact he has a yr left on his deal. They need a more athletic 4 that can stretch the floor a bit more in order to fit D'Antoni's system, not a smaller, slower PF like West.

I'm sure if they turned down J. Smith for Pau, they'd laugh at the idea of West.

The trade works big time for the Hawks though lol

BillS
11-21-2012, 12:59 PM
Not sure why anybody would be happy with another second round playoff exit. We, as fans, should have higher expectations

"Expectations"? Probably not.

"Hopes"? Certainly.

Considering only 4 teams out of 3 get to the conference finals every year, for fans of most teams to expect that level every year and be unhappy unless they reach it seems like masochism. Why indulge in a pastime that has an 87% chance of leaving you unsatisfied at any given time?

I'm happy if they have a chance, unhappy if they blow an obvious opportunity, but satisfied if they play to their potential and improve. I don't hang it on winning and only winning, there are too many things outside anyone's control that can affect that.

I believe the GOAL is a championship, but to set only the highest goal as success and rank everything else as failure is a recipe for an unhappy life. We have to take the small successes as well as the big ones.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 01:04 PM
I don't care, every single post you make is negative. I'm being serious, do you find no joy in watching basketball? You are the most negative message board personality I've ever seen.

So I'm negative because I'm saying that Danny is like Rashard Lewis? are you serious? I wasn't even talking to you anyway, you need a hug or something?

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 01:14 PM
My question is, would Danny actually be allowed to ride a white horse by the NBA? Perhaps we can expedite his recovery process.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 01:16 PM
So I'm negative because I'm saying that Danny is like Rashard Lewis? are you serious? I wasn't even talking to you anyway, you need a hug or something?

C'mon man do you really deny that you are really negative a lot of the time? It's fine and all, but it cracks me up when you get all bent out of shape about it. You should embrace your negativity like TMJ embraces his super sunshineyness.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 01:17 PM
My question is, would Danny actually be allowed to ride a white horse by the NBA? Perhaps we can expedite his recovery process.

He should try to come back dress up as Batman and in his Batmobile, that would be cool.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 01:20 PM
He should try to come back dress up as Batman and in his Batmobile, that would be cool.


I was just thinking, if you're riding on a white horse, you don't even need knees!

OlBlu
11-21-2012, 01:25 PM
Not sure why anybody would be happy with another second round playoff exit. We, as fans, should have higher expectations

You can have high expectations but this team does not have the superstars needed to go deeper into the playoffs. I predicted a first round exit before the season started and a slip to the 5th or 6th seed in the East. The Pacers did not do anything to improve their starting lineup although I am quite sure that they never drank the koolaid that insisted they already had the best starting unit in the NBA. Look at the entire NBA history of this team. One finals appearance and, I think, two ECF appearances. What makes you think they are going to get there now? Look back at some of the predictions for this team this year and you will see how out of whack, the fans expectations are. That said, this team does not need to be blown up, that takes years of rebuilding to fix and the fan base is already terribly small. It would be much better to try and make a deal to add a really good player to this current team and keep working on getting those fans back...:cool:

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2012, 01:28 PM
I love your optimism, but the reality is that the NBA is a superstar-driven league.
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When you win you are then viewed as a superstar, and when you don't win it's always counted against you even if you are a superstar.

Paul Pierce saw his status rise dramatically just by being a top scorer on the Celtics title team, and even KG and Ray Allen saw improvements in how they were viewed. But KG had better years and looked sharper while in Minny failing to win it all.

Barkley and Reggie were on the flipside always having to justify their status.


If the Pacers last year had won it all then people would think of West, Danny and maybe Roy as great. Keep in mind that to win it all they would have had to have more games like the ones where they beat Miami, so now you have more times on TV scoring points, more times being shown as the winner, more times having your image redefined by the media.

Same guys, different view. And suddenly everyone says "we gotta follow the Indiana model to draft well and home-grow the superstars" or "first Detroit and now Indiana have proven that it's a different era". I know this is true because it's how all sports are reported and viewed.

Whatever works is what is defined as great, even if 5 other teams have the same thing and flopped. And this definitely applies to "must have a superstar" because every season tons of all-stars and Dream Team types go home empty handed and no one says "time to throw that model away because it failed".

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 01:31 PM
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When you win you are then viewed as a superstar, and when you don't win it's always counted against you even if you are a superstar.

Paul Pierce saw his status rise dramatically just by being a top scorer on the Celtics title team, and even KG and Ray Allen saw improvements in how they were viewed. But KG had better years and looked sharper while in Minny failing to win it all.

Barkley and Reggie were on the flipside always having to justify their status.


If the Pacers last year had won it all then people would think of West, Danny and maybe Roy as great. Keep in mind that to win it all they would have had to have more games like the ones where they beat Miami, so now you have more times on TV scoring points, more times being shown as the winner, more times having your image redefined by the media.

Same guys, different view. And suddenly everyone says "we gotta follow the Indiana model to draft well and home-grow the superstars" or "first Detroit and now Indiana have proven that it's a different era". I know this is true because it's how all sports are reported and viewed.

Whatever works is what is defined as great, even if 5 other teams have the same thing and flopped. And this definitely applies to "must have a superstar" because every season tons of all-stars and Dream Team types go home empty handed and no one says "time to throw that model away because it failed".

It's a chicken or an egg thing, I get what you're saying, winning can make you a super star.

But maybe superstars just win?

Dunno, it's tough for me to not agree with the superstar folks after last year, not saying you can't win a title with a TEAM, just saying it's a lot harder when you hit the playoffs.

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2012, 01:32 PM
Well, no, if this happens and we go out in the second round there will be cries to blow it up because we're "only" the Atlanta Hawks and getting to the second round two years in a row is proof we're not good enough.

Remember, Championship or abject suckage failure. No middle ground.

This is why I must sit in the front row or I don't watch the game at all. I don't get why so many fans here settle for 2nd rate viewing situations. Perennial losers I guess.

Eleazar
11-21-2012, 01:36 PM
This is why I must sit in the front row or I don't watch the game at all. I don't get why so many fans here settle for 2nd rate viewing situations. Perennial losers I guess.

Some of us don't consider front row as superior. In fact I hate sitting in the front row of the floor level.

Eleazar
11-21-2012, 01:38 PM
It's a chicken or an egg thing, I get what you're saying, winning can make you a super star.

But maybe superstars just win?

Dunno, it's tough for me to not agree with the superstar folks after last year, not saying you can't win a title with a TEAM, just saying it's a lot harder when you hit the playoffs.

You also have to take into consideration that the team is still young, and it is rare that a young team wins the championship. It is usually veteran teams who have played together for a full season or two before they win a championship.

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2012, 01:39 PM
It's a chicken or an egg thing, I get what you're saying, winning can make you a super star.

But maybe superstars just win?

Dunno, it's tough for me to not agree with the superstar folks after last year, not saying you can't win a title with a TEAM, just saying it's a lot harder when you hit the playoffs.
It is a little chicken-egg, I don't disagree. I just hate they "you must have" when every season there are more teams failing using that model than winning.

I mean guys like Melo or Nash qualify as superstars and they don't make the Finals even. And then guys like Ellis or Joe Johnson or Blake Griffin - if their TEAM wins it all and they are playing, they are going to obtain superstar status unless they just were miserable in the post-season.


There's a similar stat of "must have a top 5 pick". Well no s*** all the title teams have top picks. That's because you have 8-10 active draft classes which makes 40-50 top 5 picks, and with a salary cap it's kinda hard for teams to assemble more than 2. Miami is barely getting by and has a bench so bad they could lose games for them. They are paying those 3 players nearly their entire cap space and they didn't even draft 2 of them.

Plus top 5 picks have less uncertainty for failure. They might not be stars but they have enough talent to stay in the league and land on teams, whereas pick #20 is hit and miss. So then you find that many teams have a top 5 pick which qualifies them for this rule (ahem, Mike Dunleavy) so the odds are that a random choice of teams will have a top 5 guy on it.


Just like no one threw out the stupid "no FA will sign in Indy" theory even though David West took a dump all over it in the first off-season the Pacers ever had cap space to go after someone, at least since maybe 1986.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 01:50 PM
This is why I must sit in the front row or I don't watch the game at all. I don't get why so many fans here settle for 2nd rate viewing situations. Perennial losers I guess.

You and Bill were season ticket holders when JOB was the coach I don't think you can judge other people for expecting more out of the team, as I see it doesn't matter if the worse coach in Pacers history is coaching because you two are still going to go to the games.

My point is that anytime you are telling me anything about the team and "how happy we should be just to make it to the playoffs and don't set your goals too high or you are going to be miserable" I take it with a truck load of salt because I know that either way you are going to be there.

No disrespect but fans like you are the ones that keep mediocre teams stay mediocre, when a front office knows that you are going to show up not matter what they don't try hard to put a product that could actually compete for a championship, again no disrespect ;)

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 01:52 PM
You and Bill were season ticket holders when JOB was the coach I don't think you can judge other people for expecting more out of the team, as I see it doesn't matter if the worse coach in Pacers history is coaching because you two are still going to go to the games.

My point is that anytime you are telling me anything about the team and "how happy we should be just to make it to the playoffs and don't set your goals too high or you are going to be miserable" I take it with a truck load of salt because I know that either way you are going to be there.

No disrespect but fans like you are the ones that keep mediocre teams stay mediocre, when a front office knows that you are going to show up not matter what they don't try hard to put a product that could actually compete for a championship, again no disrespect ;)

Pretty much all of this post is completely hilarious and BS too.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 01:55 PM
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When you win you are then viewed as a superstar, and when you don't win it's always counted against you even if you are a superstar.

Paul Pierce saw his status rise dramatically just by being a top scorer on the Celtics title team, and even KG and Ray Allen saw improvements in how they were viewed. But KG had better years and looked sharper while in Minny failing to win it all.

Barkley and Reggie were on the flipside always having to justify their status.


If the Pacers last year had won it all then people would think of West, Danny and maybe Roy as great. Keep in mind that to win it all they would have had to have more games like the ones where they beat Miami, so now you have more times on TV scoring points, more times being shown as the winner, more times having your image redefined by the media.

Same guys, different view. And suddenly everyone says "we gotta follow the Indiana model to draft well and home-grow the superstars" or "first Detroit and now Indiana have proven that it's a different era". I know this is true because it's how all sports are reported and viewed.

Whatever works is what is defined as great, even if 5 other teams have the same thing and flopped. And this definitely applies to "must have a superstar" because every season tons of all-stars and Dream Team types go home empty handed and no one says "time to throw that model away because it failed".

First time I hear that superstars are build on the playoffs, I guess Lebron was not a superstar before winning the finals, Wade was not a superstar before winning a championship, yep Howard, CP3 and Melo are not superstars either.

I would also like to know how many superstar less teams have won the Championship? one out of how many? and the team that did it had multiple all stars hitting their prime at the same time.

Since86
11-21-2012, 01:56 PM
No disrespect but fans like you are the ones that keep mediocre teams stay mediocre, when a front office knows that you are going to show up not matter what they don't try hard to put a product that could actually compete for a championship, again no disrespect ;)

You mean fans that actually like the franchise, and just don't jump on the bandwagon when they're good? FOR SHAME!

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:00 PM
You mean fans that actually like the franchise, and just don't jump on the bandwagon when they're good? FOR SHAME!

Fans like Seth and BillS and other folks who stick it out and buy tickets are the fans that people who stop spending money on the franchise should be thanking when they come rushing back when the going gets good again. To say that fans supporting the team is one of the reasons the team will stay mediocre is literally one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

Anyone with half a brain could figure out that a team that is making more money with more supportive fans is going to be more willing and more able (!This is the key thing) to spend on big time players or on risky trades.

The Colts got rid of Manning this offseason not because they thought the fans are just blind dummies who would hang around whether or not the Colts were good or bad, they did it because they could take a chance on Luck because the fans are loyal.

You want Simon/Walsh/et. al. to feel comfortable taking risks? Then you better be willing to put your butt in a seat whether the team is 50-32 or 32-50.

d_c
11-21-2012, 02:04 PM
First time I hear that superstars are build on the playoffs, I guess Lebron was not a superstar before winning the finals, Wade was not a superstar before winning a championship, yep Howard, CP3 and Melo are not superstars either.

I would also like to know how many superstar less teams have won the Championship? one out of how many? and the team that did it had multiple all stars hitting their prime at the same time.

And really, what actually happens when these superstars fail to win championships? It's pretty much always because they lose to a team with another superstar. Only 1 team can win it all every year. And when guys like Magic, Bird, Jordan, Kobe and Duncan dominate the game for years at a time, it's not like there's much to go around for everyone else (and thus the countless posts complaining about competitive balance, parity).

Main reason Karl Malone never won was because Jordan beat him during his best oppurtunities. It's not all that scientific.

Heck, if Jordan hadn't taken a hiatus for a couple years playing baseball, it's very possible people would be talking and analyzing why Hakeem was another superstar never good enough to win a ring.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:06 PM
You mean fans that actually like the franchise, and just don't jump on the bandwagon when they're good? FOR SHAME!

I like those fans(I like Seth, Peck, Bills, etc) I just don't feel like those fans have the right to tell me how upset I should be if the Pacers are out of the playoffs in the first round or don't make it because they go to games and buy seasons tickets not matter what.

I other words their point of view is way different than those of us that are not season ticket holders and those of us that don't like to watch a s*** product on the floor.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:09 PM
I like those fans(I like Seth, Peck, Bills, etc) I just don't feel like those fans have the right to tell me how upset I should be if the Pacers are out of the playoffs in the first round or don't make it because they go to games and buy seasons tickets not matter what.

I other words their point of view is way different than those of us that are not season ticket holders and those of us that don't like to watch a s*** product on the floor.

How does not spending money make a difference though? "Oh well we aren't getting anyt tickets, guess we should go trade for someone with a max deal...oh wait, we can't afford that"

You don't have any right to tell them how they should feel either and to accuse them of being the reason the team remains mediocre? Basically just calling them blind sheep? Complete and utter BS.

Since86
11-21-2012, 02:10 PM
I like those fans(I like Seth, Peck, Bills, etc) I just don't feel like those fans have the right to tell me how upset I should be if the Pacers are out of the playoffs in the first round or don't make it because they go to games and buy seasons tickets not matter what.

I other words their point of view is way different than those of us that are not season ticket holders and those of us that don't like to watch a s*** product on the floor.

Pointing out your unreasonable expectations isn't telling you that you don't have a right to feel a certain way. Stop with the victimization already.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:10 PM
Fans like Seth and BillS and other folks who stick it out and buy tickets are the fans that people who stop spending money on the franchise should be thanking when they come rushing back when the going gets good again. To say that fans supporting the team is one of the reasons the team will stay mediocre is literally one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

Anyone with half a brain could figure out that a team that is making more money with more supportive fans is going to be more willing and more able (!This is the key thing) to spend on big time players or on risky trades.

The Colts got rid of Manning this offseason not because they thought the fans are just blind dummies who would hang around whether or not the Colts were good or bad, they did it because they could take a chance on Luck because the fans are loyal.

You want Simon/Walsh/et. al. to feel comfortable taking risks? Then you better be willing to put your butt in a seat whether the team is 50-32 or 32-50.

I bet the Colts are selling tickets because they have Andrew Luck and not Curtis Painter, and I'm sorry I'm not expending money on a team whose goal is just to be mediocre every year.

Since86
11-21-2012, 02:12 PM
I bet the Colts are selling tickets because they have Andrew Luck and not Curtis Painter, and I'm sorry I'm not expending money on a team whose goal is just to be mediocre every year.

The Colts soldout every game last year, with Painter as QB and Luck at Stanford. Atleast pick accurate examples.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:15 PM
I bet the Colts are selling tickets because they have Andrew Luck and not Curtis Painter, and I'm sorry I'm not expending money on a team whose goal is just to be mediocre every year.

Ok then you have zero right to complain about how much money they spend or don't spend.

I own office buildings it is my job, I'm able to reinvest in my properties because people pay me rent. I couldn't do that if they didn't pay me rent. Now you would say oh they wouldn't pay you rent if you didn't do that. Do you see what I'm saying? There are similarities here.

My point on both examples, it is a two way street man, you want us to go swing for the fences? To make a trade for a guy like James Harden and then invest $80 million in him? Then you should be willing to spend on the team.

To say that the team stays mediocre because guys like Seth and Bill are just willing to keep dumping money into the team is just totally backwards and it flies in the face of what this team did in the 90s. So unless you think the Simons have just totally changed their tune maybe you should really think about what you are saying.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:15 PM
The Colts soldout every game last year, with Painter as QB and Luck at Stanford. Atleast pick accurate examples.

They sold out because they thought Manning was coming back and a lot of those tickets were sold before the season started so you are wrong.

Sollozzo
11-21-2012, 02:18 PM
The Colts soldout every game last year, with Painter as QB and Luck at Stanford. Atleast pick accurate examples.

Yeah but we didn't lose season ticket holders in 2011 because everyone assumed that Manning would play like he always had. It wasn't until late August that we knew Manning wasn't playing. We lost 13% of the season ticket holders even with a hyped player like Luck coming in. We've come close to not selling out a couple of the games. If we had another year of Painter or if this current team was really terrible even with Luck, then I fear we would have had a couple of blackouts.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:19 PM
They sold out because they thought Manning was coming back and a lot of those tickets were sold before the season started so you are wrong.

People thought the Colts were going to be total **** when this season started. Most expected 2-3 wins, and the Colts were still selling out an early game against a Minnesota Vikings squad then. No one knew what they would turn into. The Colts have been able to throw money around like drunk frat boys at a strip club because of the fan support. If people like you had jumped off the bandwagon in the mid 2000s because we weren't winning super bowls every year, they wouldn't have been able to do this. It's simple economics. You want the Pacers to spend, to make big deals, to go for home runs, but yet you say you won't spend when they suck, only when they are good again. Well that is a ****** way to make good things happen.

You say anything short of a championship is pretty much a failure, how you expect any team to ever live up to that? It's not possible.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:19 PM
Yeah but we didn't lose season ticket holders in 2011 because everyone assumed that Manning would play like he always had. It wasn't until late August that we knew Manning wasn't playing. We lost 13% of the season ticket holders even with a hyped player like Luck coming in. We've come close to not selling out a couple of the games. If we had another year of Painter or if this current team was really terrible even with Luck, then I fear we would have had a couple of blackouts.

They sold out those early season games even when people thought the Colts would suck.

Nuntius
11-21-2012, 02:20 PM
Miami played outstanding team defense. Offensively, it was only Wade and James. Superstars win championships. What makes that series painful, is that they beat us missing their 3rd superstar Bosh. That series was there for the taking, but we simply lacked the talent to get it done

No, it was not only Wade and James. I clearly remember Chalmers going off in a game when Wade couldn't get it done. I also remember Battier and Miller hitting some big 3s and Haslem hitting some key jumpers.

It was mainly Wade and James but without the help from the rest of their team they wouldn't be able to do it.

Also, I don't think we lacked the talent to get it done. What we lacked was clearly the execution to do so.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:21 PM
Pointing out your unreasonable expectations isn't telling you that you don't have a right to feel a certain way. Stop with the victimization already.

Those expectations were set up by the Pacers front office and their 3,4,5,6 maybe seven or eight years rebuilding plan, they didn't say "hey let's wait for the contracts to expire so we can sign a bunch of scrubs back", they said "we are going to do whatever is possible to build a team were we can compete for a championship" have they done that? nope.

We were all fooled to think that they were really going to do something and we bought the bs they were selling.

Sollozzo
11-21-2012, 02:21 PM
They sold out those early season games even when people thought the Colts would suck.



True, but it has been very close a couple of times. If the team was say 2-8 right now, then I fear this Bills game would be a blackout. Just a guess though.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:22 PM
It's fine to say the Pacers had a bad plan, but to act like they didn't spend? 58 million Roy Hibbert? 20 million on David West? 40 million on George Hill? The Pacers spent a lot of money and they did it on guys they thought could win, you disagree with that, but you are acting like they mislead you or something. They did no such thing.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:28 PM
Basically, Vnzla, you can say whatever you want, but you pretty much said fans that consistently spend on the Pacers are a reason the franchise will stay "mediocre". There is no way for us to find middle ground on this because fundamentally your point makes no sense, and frankly it is offensive to those who have had season tickets through the bad and good years (me being one of those people).

I support the Pacers because I want to see them succeed, not because I'm just a big idiot who lights piles of money on fire.

So as far as I'm concerned, this conversation is over, but speaking as someone who had season tix when we were watching JOB run his BS all day, and then you saying people like me are the reason this team will stay mediocre, well, you can pretty much just bite me.

And yes, I did take this personally, because it is my money and I choose to spend on the Pacers out of loyalty, and your suggestion is basically that folks like me (apparently Bill and Seth specifically) well we are just big idiots who don't get to have an opinion because we will spend our money on pretty much anything according to you. And evil Simon will just laugh all the way to the bank as he watches us suckers filter into arena as part of his master plan to stay "mediocre"

Heisenberg
11-21-2012, 02:31 PM
So I'm negative because I'm saying that Danny is like Rashard Lewis? are you serious? I wasn't even talking to you anyway, you need a hug or something?BUILD THAT NARRATIVE. You lack any semblance of critical thinking ability.

TRADE FOR MONTA GUYS!

Seriously, root for a different team.

Since86
11-21-2012, 02:32 PM
They sold out because they thought Manning was coming back and a lot of those tickets were sold before the season started so you are wrong.

:laugh: And the legend in your mind continues to grow.

Sollozzo
11-21-2012, 02:33 PM
Let's be honest though. Going to a Colts/NFL game is much more fun for your average person than a Pacers/NBA game. There are tens of thousands more people in a venue that is a lot bigger. Women seem to get excited about the Colts/NFL, but I don't see near as many women wearing Pacers/NBA gear.

Also, there are only 8 games and they are on Sundays when most people don't work. The Pacers OTOH have a bunch of weeknight games at 7 o'clock. If you're a casual fan who works downtown and lives in Carmel, then you're pretty much going to have to stay downtown for two hours after getting off at 5. You're certainly not going to drive all the way home because you're going to have to immediately get back into the car and head back downtown. So if you've been working all day, do you really want to hang around downtown for two hours after getting off, and then sit at a game until 9:30? By the time you get home at 10 or 10:30, you will have literally been gone for like 14 hours. That might not bother a diehard fan, but one can easily see where the 7 PM weeknight tipoff times are a turnoff for the casuals.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:34 PM
It's fine to say the Pacers had a bad plan, but to act like they didn't spend? 58 million Roy Hibbert? 20 million on David West? 40 million on George Hill? The Pacers spent a lot of money and they did it on guys they thought could win, you disagree with that, but you are acting like they mislead you or something. They did no such thing.

Oh yes they did, I can bring old interviews by Bird, "we are going to wait for 2011 to have expiring contracts so we can make deals for young players and picks from teams that need expirings" nothing, "we are going to wait for the summer of 2012 so we can have cap space and with the assets we have we can bring a good player or two and we can also take players other teams don't want because we are under the cap so that help us a lot" nothing.

At the end of the day after 3,4,5,6 or 7 rebuilding years all the Pacers cap space was used for was to keep Roy, Hill and sign Ian, Green and Augustin, huge fail.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:34 PM
Let's be honest though. Going to a Colts/NFL game is much more fun for your average person than a Pacers/NBA game. There are tens of thousands more people in a venue that is a lot bigger. Women seem to get excited about the Colts/NFL, but I don't see near as many women wearing Pacers/NBA gear.

Also, there are only 8 games and they are on Sundays when most people don't work. The Pacers OTOH have a bunch of weeknight games at 7 o'clock. If you're a casual fan who works downtown and lives in Carmel, then you're pretty much going to have to stay downtown for two hours after getting off at 5. You're certainly not going to drive all the way home because you're going to have to immediately get back into the car and head back downtown. So if you've been working all day, do you really want to hang around downtown for two hours after getting off, and then sit at a game until 9:30? By the time you get home at 10 or 10:30, you will have literally been gone for like 14 hours. That might not bother a diehard fan, but one can easily see where the 7 PM weeknight tipoff times are a turnoff for the casuals.

I don't disagree with any of this. I am not arguing about the Pacers draw and how entertaining they are. The point I took issue with is that fans supporting a franchise somehow lends itself to mediocrity.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:35 PM
Oh yes they did, I can bring old interviews by Bird, "we are going to wait for 2011 to have expiring contracts so we can make deals for young players and picks from teams that need expirings" nothing, "we are going to wait for the summer of 2012 so we can have cap space and with the assets we have we can bring a good player or two and we can also take players other teams don't want because we are under the cap so that help us a lot" nothing.

At the end of the day after 3,4,5,6 or 7 rebuilding years all the Pacers cap space was used for was to keep Roy, Hill and sign Ian, Green and Augustin, huge fail.


So you think the Pacers flat out lied to you basically. Why are you even still a fan then? If I felt like the Pacers had been lying to me for the past 4 years, I wouldn't even want to talk about them.


Personally, I think the Pacers plan just didn't work out how they expected, maybe that was through poor management, but I believe they intended to do what they said they did. You think they never intended to do it, so they lied to you. So like I said, I can't understand why you even want to talk about them.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:36 PM
BUILD THAT NARRATIVE. You lack any semblance of critical thinking ability.

TRADE FOR MONTA GUYS!

Seriously, root for a different team.

You need to stop drinking so early man I'm worried.

Since86
11-21-2012, 02:37 PM
Those expectations were set up by the Pacers front office and their 3,4,5,6 maybe seven or eight years rebuilding plan, they didn't say "hey let's wait for the contracts to expire so we can sign a bunch of scrubs back", they said "we are going to do whatever is possible to build a team were we can compete for a championship" have they done that? nope.

We were all fooled to think that they were really going to do something and we bought the bs they were selling.

There it is again. Because TPTB didn't live up to your unreasonable expectations, they're wrong, and it's not you.

Pretty rich coming from the guy wanted to give Nene a 16mil per year contract, which would have resulted in even less moves.

Since86
11-21-2012, 02:39 PM
It's fine to say the Pacers had a bad plan, but to act like they didn't spend? 58 million Roy Hibbert? 20 million on David West? 40 million on George Hill? The Pacers spent a lot of money and they did it on guys they thought could win, you disagree with that, but you are acting like they mislead you or something. They did no such thing.

When the Pacers don't sign someone he wants, it's a sign that they're unwilling to spend and unwilling to win. When the Pacers over pay a guy, like Ian in his mind, he then uses it as a complaint that they don't spend their money wisely.

The constant in all of this is that Vnlza likes to complain, and will use any and every angle to do it, even if it means he has do a 180 on his previous positions.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 02:40 PM
So you think the Pacers flat out lied to you basically. Why are you even still a fan then? If I felt like the Pacers had been lying to me for the past 4 years, I wouldn't even want to talk about them.

Because I had some hope? I thought they were going to do great things and they ended up not doing s***, now it looks like they are going to start with another 3 years rebuilding plan and wait for Danny's contract to expire.

Nuntius
11-21-2012, 02:42 PM
have they done that? nope.


Yes, they did.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:42 PM
Yeah, but why are you even here to wait it out? You think they falt out lied to you, that they never intended to build a true "contender", so why are you still here? Or at least why do you still call yourself a Pacer fan? If I thought they had intentionally mislead me for the past 3 years, I would be out the door before you can say phooey.

BillS
11-21-2012, 02:43 PM
Um ... wow.

So, since I am a Season Ticket Holder my opinions of what is enjoyable about being a sports fan don't count? Because I'm, what, too dumb to choose to dump the team when they lose?

Gee, guess I should never have kept supporting the team from afar and traveling across country to see them during those suckage days in the 80's and those years of only making it to the first round and out in the early 90's. If I'd just become a Boston fan and a Bulls fan (couldn't be a Hawks fan for most of those years because they usually weren't any good - except the year they got beat by the Pacers in the second round - though getting beat in the second round proves they stunk then as well, so there you go, I succeeded in that) the Pacers would have had a championship by now. Instead, by supporting the team, I guaranteed they would only get to the finals once and the ECF 5 times.

Shame on me and my indiscriminate fan addiction to a team through thick and thin, when I should have been punishing Herb Simon for not letting the team get bought and move to Sacramento in 1983 when they could have.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 02:47 PM
Um ... wow.

So, since I am a Season Ticket Holder my opinions of what is enjoyable about being a sports fan don't count? Because I'm, what, too dumb to choose to dump the team when they lose?

Gee, guess I should never have kept supporting the team from afar and traveling across country to see them during those suckage days in the 80's and those years of only making it to the first round and out in the early 90's. If I'd just become a Boston fan and a Bulls fan (couldn't be a Hawks fan for most of those years because they usually weren't any good - except the year they got beat by the Pacers in the second round - though getting beat in the second round proves they stunk then as well, so there you go, I succeeded in that) the Pacers would have had a championship by now. Instead, by supporting the team, I guaranteed they would only get to the finals once and the ECF 5 times.

Shame on me and my indiscriminate fan addiction to a team through thick and thin, when I should have been punishing Herb Simon for not letting the team get bought and move to Sacramento in 1983 when they could have.

Co-sign this. Obviously, I wasn't here for the 80s, but I've held tickets since the year before the brawl.

We just too dang dumb to go spend our money on something worthwhile Bill.

One day we can be as enlightened as Vnzla.

Peck
11-21-2012, 02:52 PM
The person enjoying this the most has to be Seth, he's not even a season ticket holder. :)

BillS
11-21-2012, 02:53 PM
This is why I must sit in the front row or I don't watch the game at all. I don't get why so many fans here settle for 2nd rate viewing situations. Perennial losers I guess.

I DO sit in the front row. One level up. Like, front row seats but turning it up a notch. So, my seats go to 11. :lmao:

RWB
11-21-2012, 03:08 PM
I DO sit in the front row. One level up. Like, front row seats but turning it up a notch. So, my seats go to 11. :lmao:
Quit lying, I can't remember seeing you sit down.

Side note.... Colts/Bills game is sold out and will be shown in Indy.

vnzla81
11-21-2012, 03:14 PM
Um ... wow.

So, since I am a Season Ticket Holder my opinions of what is enjoyable about being a sports fan don't count? Because I'm, what, too dumb to choose to dump the team when they lose?

Gee, guess I should never have kept supporting the team from afar and traveling across country to see them during those suckage days in the 80's and those years of only making it to the first round and out in the early 90's. If I'd just become a Boston fan and a Bulls fan (couldn't be a Hawks fan for most of those years because they usually weren't any good - except the year they got beat by the Pacers in the second round - though getting beat in the second round proves they stunk then as well, so there you go, I succeeded in that) the Pacers would have had a championship by now. Instead, by supporting the team, I guaranteed they would only get to the finals once and the ECF 5 times.

Shame on me and my indiscriminate fan addiction to a team through thick and thin, when I should have been punishing Herb Simon for not letting the team get bought and move to Sacramento in 1983 when they could have.

That's not what I meant, sorry if it came out that way, my point is that you and Seth at least for what I can read are happy just be competitive (not that is anything wrong with that) but if you are going to judge somebody for not been happy to be mediocre I don't think you have the leverage to do that, you are pretty much telling people to be fine with the team the way it is because you are happy with the team the way it is, you want people to be as patient as you and you want people to enjoy the team the same way you do, but the fact is that not everybody is like you or Seth and not everybody is capable of been ticket holders while one of the worse coaches in history is coaching the Pacers.

In other words your level of pain is higher than a lot of those that would never be able to do what you did or do.

Pacer Fan
11-21-2012, 03:14 PM
A bit early for this reaction. This team is talented and just need to get it together. Once Danny is back they will be hard to beat in a series. At least this is what I'm going with this early in the season.

Now if you want to talk coaching, well I'm not against firing Frank. I think he is lacking the intangibles of being a good head coach. He honestly doesn't know the strengths and weaknesses of his own team, let alone his opponent.

Sandman21
11-21-2012, 03:22 PM
I DO sit in the front row. One level up. Like, front row seats but turning it up a notch. So, my seats go to 11. :lmao:

As a fellow Club Level front rower, I concure with this. :D

Pacergeek
11-21-2012, 03:24 PM
That's not what I meant, sorry if it came out that way, my point is that you and Seth at least for what I can read are happy just be competitive (not that is anything wrong with that) but if you are going to judge somebody for not been happy to be mediocre I don't think you have the leverage to do that, you are pretty much telling people to be fine with the team the way it is because you are happy with the team the way it is, you want people to be as patient as you and you want people to enjoy the team the same way you do, but the fact is that not everybody is like you or Seth and not everybody is capable of been ticket holders while one of the worse coaches in history is coaching the Pacers.

In other words your level of pain is higher than a lot of those that would never be able to do what you did or do.

Vnzla is correct. It doesn't make you any more or less of a fan if only a championship will satisfy you. If Seth, Bills, and Peck are satisfied with a perennial playoff qualifier, with zero chance for a title, that's totally cool. Vnzla and I will not be truly happy until the Pacers get a long overdue championship. This desire doesn't make us any less of Pacer fans

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 03:24 PM
How does continuing to buy tickets show you are happy with being mediocre? It doesn't make any sense. That was Vnzla's original point, he said that the Pacers are comfortable with being mediocre because of people who continue to buy tickets.

I think everyone on this board wants a championship.

ReginaldWayne
11-21-2012, 03:25 PM
That's not what I meant, sorry if it came out that way, my point is that you and Seth at least for what I can read are happy just be competitive (not that is anything wrong with that) but if you are going to judge somebody for not been happy to be mediocre I don't think you have the leverage to do that, you are pretty much telling people to be fine with the team the way it is because you are happy with the team the way it is, you want people to be as patient as you and you want people to enjoy the team the same way you do, but the fact is that not everybody is like you or Seth and not everybody is capable of been ticket holders while one of the worse coaches in history is coaching the Pacers.

In other words your level of pain is higher than a lot of those that would never be able to do what you did or do.

This may be the longest sentence in PD history.

BillS
11-21-2012, 03:26 PM
That's not what I meant, sorry if it came out that way, my point is that you and Seth at least for what I can read are happy just be competitive (not that is anything wrong with that) but if you are going to judge somebody for not been happy to be mediocre I don't think you have the leverage to do that, you are pretty much telling people to be fine with the team the way it is because you are happy with the team the way it is, you want people to be as patient as you and you want people to enjoy the team the same way you do, but the fact is that not everybody is like you or Seth and not everybody is capable of been ticket holders while one of the worse coaches in history is coaching the Pacers.

In other words your level of pain is higher than a lot of those that would never be able to do what you did or do.

Well, no, I'm pretty sure I've just said the way I feel and wondered how anyone who DOESN'T feel that way could enjoy being a sports fan, let alone a Pacer fan. There are very few teams in sports that spend most of their time as champions, and if the only thing that makes someone happy is a championship they are going to be unhappy pretty constantly unless they are a fan of one of those teams.

Remember, we're not talking about the word "satisfied", we're talking about the word "happy", as in not being happy with getting to the second round. We've already established that you and I have a completely different meaning for the word "mediocre" - I believe it means "below average", you believe it means "average" and often seem to apply it to teams that are slightly ABOVE average but not championship contenders. We will simply continue to disagree there.

pacer4ever
11-21-2012, 03:27 PM
How does continuing to buy tickets show you are happy with being mediocre? It doesn't make any sense.

That is what I don't get I go to games and am not happy with the direction of the team. However I love the franchise and love basketball so whenever I can go to a game I will.

EDIT: Bills of course you aren't gonna win the ship every year or hell maybe ever.(with LBJ and Durant Howard and Kobe it will be tough to get 1) But I would rather have a legit shot at a championship than settle for making the playoffs and getting bounced 1st rd every year. There are only 5-6 team every year with a legit shot to win it all and this Pacers team doesn't have that ceiling to be one of those 5-6 teams IMO.

for ex: If Durant and Westbrook don't win a ship together in the next 3-6 years I wouldn't blow it up(I would maybe get rid of the supporting cast if they dont gel like they should). Because they are in that 5-6 teams that have a legit shot at a title. That is all you can ask for after that you need some luck with health and your team needs to play together as a team with the TALENT OF A ELITE TEAM.

Trader Joe
11-21-2012, 03:27 PM
That's not what I meant, sorry if it came out that way, my point is that you and Seth at least for what I can read are happy just be competitive (not that is anything wrong with that) but if you are going to judge somebody for not been happy to be mediocre I don't think you have the leverage to do that, you are pretty much telling people to be fine with the team the way it is because you are happy with the team the way it is, you want people to be as patient as you and you want people to enjoy the team the same way you do, but the fact is that not everybody is like you or Seth and not everybody is capable of been ticket holders while one of the worse coaches in history is coaching the Pacers.

In other words your level of pain is higher than a lot of those that would never be able to do what you did or do.


No one is saying that, but you did say that people who buy tickets make it easier for the team to be mediocre.

You also think the team mislead you, so like I said I'm still trying to wrap my head around why you are even still a fan.