Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

  1. #1

    Default Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    There is the Celtics,Bulls, and Lakers dynasty, could there have been a Pacers Dynasty?

    After the Pacers had broke their way into the finals I've always thought there was a glimmer of a chance that they could have created a great bit of history. I mean look at the components : Reggie Miller,Dale Davis (at his peak), the young Austin Croshere, Jalen Rose, Travis Best and many others that contributed to a great season and a great Team.

    What I'm eluding to is if this particular Team would have had time to grow together, we could have had another Bulls Team.

  2. #2
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,069

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    the 2000 finals team was a good team, but multiple championships?

    You forget half that team was comprised of old men, The other half barely could get an 8th seed without them the next year.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  3. #3
    Member Doug in CO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,175

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Um, no

    Start with the fact that Smits was even more sure of retirement than Reggie and it ends there

    But you could add in the fact that Mark Jax was done, AC was only good in one series, and the fact that Jermaine would not be here if we kept Dale Davis and I think you need to rethink the wisdom of making this post
    Heywoode says... work hard man.

  4. #4
    woman without a team
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,055

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    No.

  5. #5
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,634

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Dynasty?
    No.

    Champion?
    Yes.

    World Championship contender?
    Absolutely.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  6. #6
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,049

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Hahahahahaha. No.

    There's people on here that think otherwise, but the players started abandoning ship. It started with Mark Jackson who wanted more than he was worth. Best was finishing games instead of Mark. Donnie always pays a bit more, but he didn't give Jackson what Jackson wanted. That right there says a lot.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,655

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    No. The window of opportunity for that team was 1998, 1999, 2000 and possibly 2001.

    But the team was not dominating other teams through those years, but it did prove that it could protect its home court and play with anyone on the road.

    But I never would have considered it to be a dynasty, but instead just a team that could find ways to win the close games.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    I can think of two reasons why that team never became a dynasty: Shaq and Kobe.

  9. #9
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    No way. That team was done.

    I'm not sure it was broken up in the right way; our post-Rik and post-Jack contingency plans were, in hindsight, not so great.

    But I've got no doubt in my mind that the Pacers of 2000 were making thier last gasp effort at a ring.

    1999 was thier year, and they flat-out blew it. By 2000, the Lakers were clearly the team of the present and the near-term future. Perhaps if we already had one ring, which might've prevented AD from requesting a trade (or might not have), then the 2000 team could've had the necessary experience to 'repeat', but there's no way they would've beaten the 2001 Lakers. And that's a lot of "what-ifs".
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  10. #10
    Member Doug in CO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,175

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Our best team was in 1998 when we lost to the Bulls - then for some reason we lost to an inferior team in the Kincks in '99 - 2000 was the last year of our potential 'dynasty.'

    I do think that we would have won a title against any of the other Western representative (other than the one we played) in the years we lost in the ECF.
    Heywoode says... work hard man.

  11. #11
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,771

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    I'll keep this short and simle.

    The Pacers from 1994 through 2000 overachieved to do as well as they did. They maxed out their talent, through excellent coaching and great chemistry

  12. #12
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'll keep this short and simle.

    The Pacers from 1994 through 2000 overachieved to do as well as they did. They maxed out their talent, through excellent coaching and great chemistry
    I learned yesterday that its "maximized".

    So we're going to get into this overachieving comment this summer...

    But don't you think the 1999 (lockout) team was 'the team to beat' in the entire league? In other words, you think they maximized thier ability but I think they failed to hit thier potential as a championship-worthy team.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  13. #13
    Member Doug in CO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,175

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I learned yesterday that its "maximized".

    So we're going to get into this overachieving comment this summer...

    But don't you think the 1999 (lockout) team was 'the team to beat' in the entire league? In other words, you think they maximized thier ability but I think they failed to hit thier potential as a championship-worthy team.
    The lockout team was the best team in the league - we blew it that year.
    Heywoode says... work hard man.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    I agree with alot of replies in this post, the 2000 Pacers were probably just a Championship team rather than a Dynasty, I just always wanted to think that they would have been a dynasty.

    But.............

    It would have been pretty sweet,eh?

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,136

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    If the team had stayed together (with Bird as coach) IMO they would have made the finals again the following year - and possibly the year after. They'd have probably contended to this very day - unless you're saying that DD and Reggie are washed up now? Mark Jackson was no slower the following two years than he'd been with the Pacers.

    I should qualify this with an IF AD hadn't been traded for Bender because he could have stepped right in as starting center. Not so sure if you'd had to rely on Perkins & Foster.

    Would you have won a title? Possibly - impossible to say really.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  16. #16
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty

    Quote Originally Posted by 8.9_seconds
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    Minus the Bulls, I say the Pacers would have at least 3 rings by now. With the Bulls and tons of talent and heart, at least one in '98.The Pacers never had the recognizable supporting cast to carry a so-called dynasty I guess.
    By my count minus the Bulls the best the Pacers could've done was 1 ring because I can only remember the Bulls meeting us once in the playoffs.

    Part of that time Michael was suspended from the NBA due to gambl....errr I mean retired and playing baseball. Other times it wasn't the Bulls who stopped us. NY Knicks, Orlando, Atlanta, NY Knicks (again), LA... that's who stopped us on other occassions.

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  17. #17
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Quote Originally Posted by 8.9_seconds
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with alot of replies in this post, the 2000 Pacers were probably just a Championship team rather than a Dynasty, I just always wanted to think that they would have been a dynasty.

    I think that they had a broad window of opportunity in the mid and late '90's, but their efforts were derailed due to the great teamwork of The Chicago Bulls. Let's face it, the Bulls had a complete team, no question. The combined efforts of Pippen,Jordan,and Rodman lead them to 6 NBA championships and much due respect and support.Sure, we had Reggie and Companay, but the and company was just a revolving door.

    Minus the Bulls, I say the Pacers would have at least 3 rings by now. With the Bulls and tons of talent and heart, at least one in '98.The Pacers never had the recognizable supporting cast to carry a so-called dynasty I guess.

    But.............

    It would have been pretty sweet,eh?


    We've only met the Bulls once in the playoffs, during thier last title run. So I don't understand how, minus the Bulls dynasty of the 1990s, you say we'd have at least three rings by now?

    Houston, New York, or Utah might've had more. Miami, Orlando, and Seattle each would've had chances. (Who did the Bulls play in the 1996 ECFs - New York? I don't remember) I'm not sure, minus the Bulls, that we would've even been the favorites any year but 1999.

    And what revolving door did we have? Rik, Dale, Tony and Derrick were in place for the entire run (but for the last season without Tony). Jackson was here for most of our run. There was some turnover - Sam Mitchell and Byron Scott out, Jalen Rose and Sam Perkins in, but not much - certainly not much among our 'core' team.

    Some of these threads are just getting silly.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  18. #18
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote


    We've only met the Bulls once in the playoffs, during thier last title run. So I don't understand how, minus the Bulls dynasty of the 1990s, you say we'd have at least three rings by now?

    Houston, New York, or Utah might've had more. Miami, Orlando, and Seattle each would've had chances. (Who did the Bulls play in the 1996 ECFs - New York? I don't remember) I'm not sure, minus the Bulls, that we would've even been the favorites any year but 1999.

    And what revolving door did we have? Rik, Dale, Tony and Derrick were in place for the entire run (but for the last season without Tony). Jackson was here for most of our run. There was some turnover - Sam Mitchell and Byron Scott out, Jalen Rose and Sam Perkins in, but not much - certainly not much among our 'core' team.

    Some of these threads are just getting silly.

    Quick Draw McGraw...

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  19. #19
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    I was thinking more of Wile E. Coyote/ Road Runner.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  20. #20
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,960

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Just to play devil's advocate, if Jordan hadn't come back, we would have had a higher seed in '96, meaning we would have played a worse team than Atlanta in the first round. Perhaps we get out of the first round then, Reggie continues to play Reggie-esque even with the bad eye, we get some momentum, etc, etc. We sooo could have beaten Seattle. The problem is, I'm afraid Shaq still would have kicked our *** again in the ECF.

    (But then, maybe those events mean we wouldn't trade Mark to Denver, and the Season That Didn't Happen, well, didn't happen. )
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  21. #21
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,771

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Quote Originally Posted by DisplacedKnick
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If the team had stayed together (with Bird as coach) IMO they would have made the finals again the following year - and possibly the year after. They'd have probably contended to this very day - unless you're saying that DD and Reggie are washed up now? Mark Jackson was no slower the following two years than he'd been with the Pacers.

    I should qualify this with an IF AD hadn't been traded for Bender because he could have stepped right in as starting center. Not so sure if you'd had to rely on Perkins & Foster.

    Would you have won a title? Possibly - impossible to say really.


    For sake of discussion lets say I agree with you (I don't by the way), where would the franchise be right now if the old team was kept together until right now

  22. #22
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,634

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For sake of discussion lets say I agree with you (I don't by the way), where would the franchise be right now if the old team was kept together until right now

    In as good a shape as it is right now.

    You are already on record from the last party as saying you would rather have potential future wins as opposed to past championships so in some ways there is no middle ground here. Because I would have killed for one title in the past 3-5 years.

    Now to your point because I'm ready for this one.

    Ok, let's start. Our starting shooting guard from the 00 season was Reggie Miller.

    Our starting power foreward from the 00 season was Dale Davis.

    Both of them are still & would have been starters from then to now.

    Let's go player by player.

    Jeff Foster, Jon Bender & Austin Croshere were already on the team so there would have been no changes made to get them.

    That's five of 15 right there.

    Jamaal Tinsley was aquired by using a future first round pick. There is zero reason to beleive the exact same trade could not have been made. Jamaal would have had the experiance of learning from Mark Jackson for a year, is that the worst thing you could think of happening?

    Here you go, this one is for you. Jalen Rose, Travis Best & (I can't remember his name) for Brad Miller, Ron Artest, Ron Mercer & Kevin Ollie could have still been done without any change of what you see on the floor right now.

    So therefor we could still have had your precious Ron Artest & guess what we could have had a front court of Dale Davis, Brad Miller & Ron Artest. That's a pretty good lineup & not one of them is being paid the Max.

    Anthony Johnson was picked up via free agency. We could still have done that.

    Stephen Jackson for Al Harrington could still have been done.

    David Harrison was the last pick in the first round, so I think we could still have pulled that off.

    John Edwards was undrafted free agent.

    Eddie Gill was a free agent with the vet. min. that still could have been done.

    The two players that may or may not have been here because of keeping the team together would have been Fred Jones. Because it would be easy to argue that we would not have had that high of a draft pick & Jermaine O'Neal because he would have been in Portland.

    Now if you feel that the entire franchise rest around O'Neal then you will feel that the team would be in far worse shape.

    If you feel that other players could replace O'Neal then you will see my point of view that we would not be any worse & in my twisted logic might be better.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  23. #23
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    Now if you feel that the entire franchise rest around O'Neal then you will feel that the team would be in far worse shape.

    If you feel that other players could replace O'Neal then you will see my point of view that we would not be any worse & in my twisted logic might be better.
    And Austin Croshere would've had the role intended for him when he was signed that summer and not the role he was forced into when DW got angry at DD and jettisoned him off to Portland. I never thought JO was part of a long term plan that had been brewing and that is one of the reasons... Why would you sign Austin Croshere to his contract if you had plans to make a play for JO?

    And before anyone jumps on me... That is not to say Croshere is better than JO. That is to say Austin's contract made little sense the second JO was brought in. Hmmmm maybe Austin would've made a nice sign and trade package to Portland for JO?

    If I was the GM we wouldn't have traded Dale Davis. If I wanted JO we would've found another way to get it done or waited for him to set a couple more years on the Portland bench.

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  24. #24
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty?

    Peck, we know where you stand, but let me say this.

    I would rather have Jermaine O'Neal than Dale Davis. YOU would rather have Jermaine O'Neal than Dale Davis. Any way you spin it, that was a good trade.

    I don't believe that team could have beaten the Lakers in 2001 or 2002, the Spurs in 2003, or the Pistons in 2004. And when you're really honest, I don't think you do either.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  25. #25
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,129

    Default Re: Does anyone believe that the Pacers' Finals team could have been the next Dynasty

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Peck, we know where you stand, but let me say this.

    I would rather have Jermaine O'Neal than Dale Davis. YOU would rather have Jermaine O'Neal than Dale Davis. Any way you spin it, that was a good trade.

    I don't believe that team could have beaten the Lakers in 2001 or 2002, the Spurs in 2003, or the Pistons in 2004. And when you're really honest, I don't think you do either.
    I think in at least one of those years if not a couple we would've been back in the championship series... and you can't win a championship if you don't get there in the first place.

    And Peck just laid out a series of changes that would've been tweaks to the core, and not an overhaul like we got, that would put us right here today sans JO.



    -Bball
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •