From the uninspiring draft picks to low risk/low-medium reward FAs, the Pacers will forever stay just good enough to get a low seed for the playoffs.
While there are teams that always seem to languish in the lottery, I guess it could be worse, but damn, as a fan, I want to believe that management wants that championship.
And if you need any further proof that this is in the team's DNA look no further than back in the day when Barkley wanted to come here, even lobbied for it thru Reggie, and the team brass didn't even entertain the idea.
We went from a JOB team with no hope at all, to a top 3 seed and a 2nd round playoff appearance in less than a year. We have already improved the team for next season. We are making steps, if Paul blows up or our team develops elite chemistry we'll be a contender, that is our only hope.
What the hell do you people want? From the gutter to the championship in 2 seasons? Lebron, Dwight and Deron to all come to Indy cause it's a nice place to live? Some of you people can't be pleased, regardless.
Repeat after me, Top free agents are NEVER to have Indy on the top of their list. King Tuts Tomb's list pretty well covers what could or couldn't have happened. At some point people need to accept reality or find another team.
Hicks, I certainly get why you are leaving now.
I like that our new FO is actually making moves at this time of the year unlike the Morway/Bird front office.
What really matters is the Pacers don't even try. Cap space or not, they don't try. It's not in their business model. Bird could've figured out there was no chance to attract FA's to Pacerland long before now if that was the reason he left. He could've left after last season or at any point if that was the case. How would you explain his constant mentions of questioning Simon's desire to do what it takes or not before ultimately leaving if he knew no FA would come here? Let alone reports that claim Bird left because Simon wasn't willing to spend. While that might be open for some interpretation, none of those interpretations could possibly be he grew frustrated that FA's wouldn't come here.
And I agree... Simon will spend... But not on any players but his own... Unless they come at a discount...
And all that said, the Pacers themselves got West to come here just last season, but on a bargain deal. That 'bargain deal' simply isn't going to happen often if you try and polish your team thru free agency to find a missing piece.
Seriously, this inferiority complex needs to cease.
Other teams in the East were making bold moves. Pacers did not make a single bold move. That's my only complaint. Always going with low risk/low-medium reward players...basically safe bets. I'd just like to seem them gamble a bit. They moved so quickly this offseason that they didn't put themselves in a position to pick up a amnestied player on the cheap. For all our gruff about not getting big FAs. Amnestied players are usually cheap, which should be a focus for Pacers management.
Hell, I hope they pick up Blatche for less than MLE. Dude's got talent, and I think he deserves a chance. Pacers did with Lance and he seems to be a much better guy. Isn't Clark Kellog in charge of player development? I think he could help Blatche too. Plus, I think Blatche realizes he's on very thin ice and will be better for it. Blatche could be a potential home run. I think he's a low risk/high reward type of player the Pacers should pick up. He'd instantly be better than Hans. He's low risk, cause I bet he would be signed for cheap and he's coming off the bench.
But I think we all know the Pacers aren't going to do it. They'll more than likely sign Machado or some other guard that will just rot on the bench.
The question is still valid. Out of the list of the top FAs there were very good reasons that the Pacers wouldn't have won on them. Which ones do you think they should have tried on anyway?
Of the remaining FAs, which ones do you think we just didn't bother on?
I'm not getting that an assumption of complete inactivity leads to such certainty - especially when 12 hours after the FA market opened people were totally and abswolutely convinced the Pacers would do nothing at all - possibly not even re-sign Roy - and here we are with a ton of moves.
Which moves do you think the Pacers could have made successfully and which moves they DID make would you have dumped in their favor?
For example, I think nwhen the Pacers approached Mayo he was at $8M and they moved on, then Mayo realized no one was paying that so took $4M from the Mavs. Would you rather wee had not bothered making any other moves - including stalling signing Roy - to wait and see if Mayo would cut his requirements? Do you really think he would have done so?
It's too early for me to form an opinion one way or another. I'll let the results of their player acquisitions speak for themselves.
who has final say on trades, drafting, FA, etc at this point in our FO. Walsh or Pritchard ?
The article only mentions the interest from the Pacers not from Barkley, but he definitely had a big interest in the Pacers as well. You can hear the defeatist tone in DWs quotes. Ultimately DW decided he was to expensive to pursue. I remember it pissed me off because it was the rare chance to add a great player and we passed. That's the starting point for me to start questioning the teams desire to win a title. If you want to win a title in Indiana you are going to have to take some big chances. They won't. They'll take the conservative good team over the potential great team every time. And, unfortunately, it will be good enough in this market. 6 years from now everyone will call the team a success as long as they make the playoffs and tease you with the possibility that if all the stars aligned, they maybe, possibly could almost win a title. And when they don't, the fans will say "they tried hard, what else could they have possibly done?"
I was around when Barkley picked Houston over the Pacers, not sure about all the revisionist history now saying we were just to cheap to pursue hm. Barkley thought he had a better chance at Houston, period......... he was wrong.
Phew. OK, rant off.
If Hibbert couldn't see the advantage of holding off re-signing for the good of the team shame on him. He was going to get paid what Porland was going to pay him. Was he afraid Walsh would go back on his word? Same applies with Hill.
Devil's advocate: I firmly believe ownership put a limit on what they would pay this year. The money wasn't there to spend, so Hibbert and Hill got signed early. What was left got spent to solidify the bench.
In order for this team to get an Allstar and have a shot to get the NBA finals this coming year, there is going to have to be a trade, probably Granger. I'd love to think Simon gave Walsh the green light to spend up to the LT, and Walsh is keeping the 5 mil held back for salary of an incoming Allstar in a trade this off season. I believe that is just wishful thinking on my part.
I'm not advocating Granger being traded. He's just the most reasonable choice to get an Allstar and being able to match an Allstar salary with Granger's salary plus the 5 mil I mentioned.
I think it's just as plausible that the front office courts those guys but are never at the top of their list, so they move on before the discussions ever get serious. Why waste time talking with someone you're a long shot at ever signing?
Also, vnzla likes to point out that people go to the Lakers because they can do whatever is necessary to win, but the fact is they can do whatever it takes because they can afford it. If Simon was netting a 200 million a year TV deal, among everything else, he wouldn't care about how much he spends either. The ability to do "whatever is necessary to win" goes hand in hand with being a large market as well.
There are plenty of legitimate things the Pacers have done wrong. Please complain about those, not the things they have completely no control over.