Page 7 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 530

Thread: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

  1. #151
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    29
    Posts
    39,840

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by kent beckley View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Remember Roy and Oden were injured because Nate didn't condition them enough, lol
    You guys laugh about this, but you know that Nate, KP and a lot of the leadership of those Blazer teams got busted for ignoring a pretty scathing report from an independent research firm they hired to examine the gaits and running patterns of their players right?

    Roy and Oden in particular were suggested by this group that they needed more rest to heal existing injuries and the study even suggested that Oden should sit out like an entire year to heal and fix his running gait and the Blazers ignored the report.



  2. #152
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    29
    Posts
    39,840

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Isn't it telling that when Nate left Portland he was not hired as a head coach again for 4 years and when he was it was by a franchise that happened to already have him on the salary?



  3. #153
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    17,306

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    The result of the coaching search was definitely a let down.

    Knowing what we know now (Bird leaving), if we were determined to hire a retread I wish it would have been McHale.

  4. #154
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    29
    Posts
    39,840

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The result of the coaching search was definitely a let down.

    Knowing what we know now (Bird leaving), if we were determined to hire a retread I wish it would have been McHale.
    Or knowing that this offseason could have the level of overturn it has proven to had (which we should have), I think the best course would have been, keep Vogel for one more year, hope the Pacers improve on their 45 win mark. If not, then you move on from Vogel and likely PG and actually start anew. Instead we're now stuck with Nate and my big concern is that he is going to continue to hamstring the usage of Myles on offense.



  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Trader Joe For This Useful Post:


  6. #155
    Member ksuttonjr76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, IA
    Posts
    6,028

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Isn't it telling that when Nate left Portland he was not hired as a head coach again for 4 years and when he was it was by a franchise that happened to already have him on the salary?
    No...not really. Maybe he didn't want to be Head Coach anymore.


    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

  7. #156
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    22,581

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    I think the Nate hire is a perfect example of why people don't have confidence in this organization to lay all the cards on the table. I would have preferred that we kept Vogel, but I could have listened to canning him if we were going to conduct a real outside coaching search instead of lazily promoting an assistant who at best is completely average.

    We're an attractive organization. We're one of the more successful franchises over the last 25 years, have good fan support, play in a beautiful arena, and a year ago had Paul George as well as a promising rookie in Turner. I think we could have had some quality candidates interested. I would have rather taken a gamble on an unproven assistant (like 2011 Vogel) than go with proven mediocre like McMillan.

    To Walsh's credit, he made some bold external hires in Brown, Bird, and Zeke (though that one didn't work out so well). I'll just never understand why we were so lazy a year ago.

  8. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  9. #157
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    29
    Posts
    39,840

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No...not really. Maybe he didn't want to be Head Coach anymore.
    lol



  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Trader Joe For This Useful Post:


  11. #158
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    17,306

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No...not really. Maybe he didn't want to be Head Coach anymore.
    Well he interviewed with Sacramento in 2016, LA and Cleveland in 2014, LAC, Atlanta, Milwaukee and Detroit in 2013 and Charlotte in 2012.

    Something tells me he was interested in being a head coach somewhere.

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ace E.Anderson For This Useful Post:


  13. #159

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    "have good fan support"???????

  14. #160
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    22,581

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by I Love P View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    "have good fan support"???????

    Absolutely. Our 90's fan support was insane. From 04-11, we really did everything possible to horrify and run off customers: the infamous brawl, Artest trade demand, multiple scary off the court incidents, etc. Then we got rid of the bad seeds, but replaced them with crappy players who played an unwatchable form of basketball coached by Jim O'Brien. It would really be impossible for a team to do more to run off their fans. We did everything wrong that you possibly could.

    Then look how quickly they came back from 11-14. The crowds during the 2013 run were electrifying, and that was just two and a half years after the team was still loathed with O'Brien as the coach. There has always been a deep undercurrent of support for the Pacers. The bottom line is that bad/mediocre NBA basketball sucks, so you do have to build something. When we build something, the fans show up.

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  16. #161

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad


  17. #162

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by I Love P View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    "have good fan support"???????
    Yeah, you know that every city has the "best fans in the country".

  18. #163

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    If you go to home playoff games then yes...best fans ever, although depends on who the series is against. If it's vs ATL or Orlando like a few years ago you can get in for about $6 a game, but still sold out. If you play Chicago or lebron it's about 60/40 Pacers fans....actually vs Chicago it's 70/30 Bulls-Pacers. If you watch regular season home games from your couch then you probably think there's good support by what Chris Denari says. Denari lies about the attendance each home game. He'll say 17,400 in attendance tonight & you'll see from different camera angles the club/balcony is about 9% full.

    The Pacers & Colts both share the same fanbase, you need 4-5 seasons straight of great play to get the fanbase back & have to continue the success to keep them around. Those b2b ECF teams from a few years back would probably just now starting to sell out each game had they kept their success.. The Colts are losing a big chunk of their "fanbase" after these last two 8-8 seasons. 70% of people who attend Colts games go because they're good or it's the "cool thing to do," they just wanna be seen or be able to say they went to the game. More of a party or event than a game.

  19. #164
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    22,581

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by I Love P View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So in a dreadfully boring season in which our superstar was out with a gruesome leg injury and we didn't make the playoffs, we still filled at 93% capacity. Yep, solid support.

    You do realize that if the Pacers filled to 100% capacity, the best they could be is 13th because of arena size, right?

    Hell, we had the fifth highest local TV rating this past season, and that was with an incredibly mediocre team! Google the Sports Business Journal study.

    Pacers fan support is inarguably good, all things considered.

  20. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  21. #165
    --------- freddielewis14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    indianapolis
    Posts
    7,801

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You guys laugh about this, but you know that Nate, KP and a lot of the leadership of those Blazer teams got busted for ignoring a pretty scathing report from an independent research firm they hired to examine the gaits and running patterns of their players right?

    Roy and Oden in particular were suggested by this group that they needed more rest to heal existing injuries and the study even suggested that Oden should sit out like an entire year to heal and fix his running gait and the Blazers ignored the report.
    The story I remember said the GM were for the tests but the medical staff found the tests absurd and completely dismissed them. I don't even remember Nate being involved.

  22. #166
    --------- freddielewis14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    indianapolis
    Posts
    7,801

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well he interviewed with Sacramento in 2016, LA and Cleveland in 2014, LAC, Atlanta, Milwaukee and Detroit in 2013 and Charlotte in 2012.

    Something tells me he was interested in being a head coach somewhere.
    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Isn't it telling that when Nate left Portland he was not hired as a head coach again for 4 years and when he was it was by a franchise that happened to already have him on the salary?
    I think it's just the nature of their only being 30 of these jobs available. I'm not saying Nate is good or bad here, I'm just saying not being hired for awhile doesn't neccisarily mean anything.

  23. #167
    --------- freddielewis14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    indianapolis
    Posts
    7,801

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think the Nate hire is a perfect example of why people don't have confidence in this organization to lay all the cards on the table. I would have preferred that we kept Vogel, but I could have listened to canning him if we were going to conduct a real outside coaching search instead of lazily promoting an assistant who at best is completely average.

    We're an attractive organization. We're one of the more successful franchises over the last 25 years, have good fan support, play in a beautiful arena, and a year ago had Paul George as well as a promising rookie in Turner. I think we could have had some quality candidates interested. I would have rather taken a gamble on an unproven assistant (like 2011 Vogel) than go with proven mediocre like McMillan.

    To Walsh's credit, he made some bold external hires in Brown, Bird, and Zeke (though that one didn't work out so well). I'll just never understand why we were so lazy a year ago.
    This was something I was saying earlier, this move didn't show a dedication to being a contender IMO. But none of the moves did.

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to freddielewis14 For This Useful Post:


  25. #168

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So in a dreadfully boring season in which our superstar was out with a gruesome leg injury and we didn't make the playoffs, we still filled at 93% capacity. Yep, solid support.

    You do realize that if the Pacers filled to 100% capacity, the best they could be is 13th because of arena size, right?

    Hell, we had the fifth highest local TV rating this past season, and that was with an incredibly mediocre team! Google the Sports Business Journal study.

    Pacers fan support is inarguably good, all things considered.
    What are you talking about? Play around with the years on there. Pacers in bottom 10 basically every single year, including last in a few. Pacers attendance sucks & always will suck until they are legit contenders for several consecutive years. The 2-3 year window isn't enough to get people on board. Pacers need 5 straight seasons of 50+ wins & multiple ECF appearances & even a trip or two to the finals. Anything else & Im going to continue to feel bad for the ticket reps

  26. #169

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by I Love P View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Ok I see, 2015 is what pops up but use that drop down button & click different years. Poor attendance. Anyone with an eye or two that works & goes to games on a regular basis can tell you the attendance fan support sucks. That's why you can be a season ticket holder for about $250 if you use stubhub/ticket master resale.

  27. #170
    --------- freddielewis14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    indianapolis
    Posts
    7,801

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Nate's got a career winning percentage of 51% over 13 seasons. He's 28 games over .500 for his career. Essentially he's finished 2 games over .500 on average over his career as a head coach.

    What was the Pacers record last year? 42-40. Down 3 games from a year before with a roster that had more talent. Fit was maybe slightly worse, but not enough in the East that it should have mattered IMHO.

    Good, bad, average, above average, the Pope...I don't care what you want to label Nate Mcmillan, but he's exactly what most of us thought he was last summer. A dude who can get you to .500 or slightly above it but not much further.

    Vogel may prove to be the same sort of guy over the long haul, but if the discussion is "Could we have, should we have done a better job replacing Frank?" then the answer is a resounding Yes.
    And this was most of what I was saying.

    I don't think Nate is a great coach and even I would rather have Vogel. But I trust KP and think there is no way in hell Nate was hired without KP support. So I'm willing to give Nate another season to see if he can be better at maxing the talent he has with a more balanced team.

  28. #171

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Nobody goes when the Pacers put out a competitive team each year. Imagine if they tanked. Literally I don't think they'd be able to fill the lower bowl if they gave tix away at the door. And if they didn't give away free tickets I could see on average 1000-2000 fans at each game.

  29. #172
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    6,439

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by I Love P View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What are you talking about? Play around with the years on there. Pacers in bottom 10 basically every single year, including last in a few. Pacers attendance sucks & always will suck until they are legit contenders for several consecutive years. The 2-3 year window isn't enough to get people on board. Pacers need 5 straight seasons of 50+ wins & multiple ECF appearances & even a trip or two to the finals. Anything else & Im going to continue to feel bad for the ticket reps
    You didn't read his post or the ESPN stats. First, because of our small facility, we can't finish higher than 12th or 13th even if we win 6 championships in a row. Let that sink in for a second. We're always going to hover between the middle and the end in those lists, depending on how good we are. Second, you go back through those years and you'll see that our numbers only dipped low during our mediocre JOB years, which was absolutely the worst, and we had already been through the Brawl etc... Easily the low point of the franchise in the last few decades. After JOB left and PG started to come into his own, our numbers crept back up into respectable territory. Outside of the JOB years (2007-2011) we hovered between 88-92% attendance rate, which is completely respectable. During years where we legitimately contend, it always pegs. In 2014, during our big battles with the Heat, it was 96%. And it's stayed around 92% ever since, despite some mediocrity. And I can assure you that during the peak Reggie 90s years in MSA, attendance/loudness wasn't a problem.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kid Minneapolis For This Useful Post:


  31. #173
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,947

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by I Love P View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Nobody goes when the Pacers put out a competitive team each year. Imagine if they tanked. Literally I don't think they'd be able to fill the lower bowl if they gave tix away at the door. And if they didn't give away free tickets I could see on average 1000-2000 fans at each game.
    Thus you see why management has never agreed to "tank" the way that a lot of people on the internet do. Take a look a the 15 season again and see who is dead last in attendance. I don't care how rich a person is, not a lot of people would be willing to eat deep losses for untold years for the hopes of one day getting a 5 year window or so where they "might" have super attendance.

    However here is where I will disagree with you while somewhat agreeing with you. We have a very horrible casual fan base. I am in agreement with you on that. As long as we are one of the top 3 teams in the Eastern conference we can attract a decent attendance, as long as IU has a mediocre season and the Colts are just OK. But whenever we have a mediocre or below season and the other activities in town are at a higher level our attendance is mediocre at best.

    However while we have a horrible casual fan base, I believe we have an extraordinarily high die hard fan base. I believe the number is between 8-10 and those fans are there come hell or high water. So it would never get down to the 1-2 k number.


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

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Peck For This Useful Post:


  33. #174
    --------- freddielewis14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    indianapolis
    Posts
    7,801

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thus you see why management has never agreed to "tank" the way that a lot of people on the internet do. Take a look a the 15 season again and see who is dead last in attendance. I don't care how rich a person is, not a lot of people would be willing to eat deep losses for untold years for the hopes of one day getting a 5 year window or so where they "might" have super attendance.

    However here is where I will disagree with you while somewhat agreeing with you. We have a very horrible casual fan base. I am in agreement with you on that. As long as we are one of the top 3 teams in the Eastern conference we can attract a decent attendance, as long as IU has a mediocre season and the Colts are just OK. But whenever we have a mediocre or below season and the other activities in town are at a higher level our attendance is mediocre at best.

    However while we have a horrible casual fan base, I believe we have an extraordinarily high die hard fan base. I believe the number is between 8-10 and those fans are there come hell or high water. So it would never get down to the 1-2 k number.
    The worst the modern Pacers get are about 80% - which I think is pretty good considering how spread out the city is with a low metro and downtown population.

    It was 7 years ago during the MurphLeavy years, Danny/Murphy/Dun all missed around 20 games, JOB coached his last full season and Pacers only won 32 games. We sold 78% of the tickets over 41 games that season. That's when I first started going to every game and was just buying scalper tickets to sit lower level dirt cheap. I was spending $10-20 a game and could have a row to myself some nights, so it looked bad, but was it really that bad?

    Philly sold at 68% in 2015! I've been to several Pacer games in Philly. Huge metro population, easy train to the a fantastic stadium that sits in another cool attraction called Live! and it's one of my favorite venues for road Pacer games.

    Sense 2007 Indy downtown is denser. The city changed really fast after hosting the Super Bowl. All this to say is I don't think Indy would ever get below 80% again and I think Indy being a fair weather casual fan base is over blown.

    Just look at other cities with MUCH bigger populations.

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to freddielewis14 For This Useful Post:


  35. #175
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,947

    Default Re: Don't look now, but Pacers aren't all that bad

    Quote Originally Posted by freddielewis14 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The worst the modern Pacers get are about 80% - which I think is pretty good considering how spread out the city is with a low metro and downtown population.

    It was 7 years ago during the MurphLeavy years, Danny/Murphy/Dun all missed around 20 games, JOB coached his last full season and Pacers only won 32 games. We sold 78% of the tickets over 41 games that season. That's when I first started going to every game and was just buying scalper tickets to sit lower level dirt cheap. I was spending $10-20 a game and could have a row to myself some nights, so it looked bad, but was it really that bad?

    Philly sold at 68% in 2015! I've been to several Pacer games in Philly. Huge metro population, easy train to the a fantastic stadium that sits in another cool attraction called Live! and it's one of my favorite venues for road Pacer games.

    Sense 2007 Indy downtown is denser. The city changed really fast after hosting the Super Bowl. All this to say is I don't think Indy would ever get below 80% again and I think Indy being a fair weather casual fan base is over blown.

    Just look at other cities with MUCH bigger populations.
    That's the real problem though with judging attendance by tickets sold (although admittedly that really is the only way to do it). So many tickets are purchased by ticket brokers/scalpers that it automatically inflates the number of people buy tickets vs how many people actually bought tickets to go to the game. I assume this is typical of every team however I am not sure ticket brokers are legal everywhere?

    Just like the Philly tickets, there is no real actual way that 68% of that arena was bought by people attending the game. I hate to keep referring to the article but a few years back a guy purchased an entire section, not just a row, in Philly for 28 cents per ticket off of stub hub. There was a photo of him sitting there by himself in the game. So in other words that entire section was bought at close to face value or maybe a season ticket discount by someone with the intention of reselling, man did they take a bath on that. But it still shows up as tickets sold.

    Believe me I am old enough to remember the curtains at MSA, this area does not always offer strong support. However again I still say die hards are here and we are about 8-10k strong.


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

  36. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Peck For This Useful Post:


Posting Permissions

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