View Poll Results: Which EC teams are more talented than the Pacers?

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • Cleveland

    25 96.15%
  • Boston

    25 96.15%
  • Orlando

    25 96.15%
  • Atlanta

    23 88.46%
  • Miami

    20 76.92%
  • Philadelphia

    15 57.69%
  • Chicago

    21 80.77%
  • Detroit

    16 61.54%
  • Charlotte

    4 15.38%
  • Milwaukee

    7 26.92%
  • New York

    1 3.85%
  • Washington

    7 26.92%
  • New Jersey

    2 7.69%
  • Toronto

    9 34.62%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Talent Level

  1. #1
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Talent Level

    There's been a lot of talk about the Pacers being a team that's low on talent. I've bought into this to a certain extent, but I'm starting to rethink it a bit.

    Also, I think the evaluations of talent level will be different at the end of the season than at the beginning.

    Let's take a team like Philadelphia. Do they really have more talent than the Pacers? How would you rank the significant players on both rosters? I think Granger's #1, followed closely by Iguodala at #2, and Andre Miller at #3. After that it gets pretty murky, but I think you could make the case that Ford, Jack, and Murphy are as good as anybody else on Philly's roster, especially if you don't count Elton Brand.

    I'm really out to see on this issue, but I'm leaning toward saying that I think the Pacers underacheived from a talent perspective, but I can't seem to muster any vitriol towards O'Brien or the players when I say this.

    I guess I need to do a better job factoring in the fact that we were getting contributions from Rush and Hibbert at the end of the season that we weren't at the beginning and these contribuitions have drastically affected my appraisal of our talent level.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  2. #2
    Member idioteque's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    washington dc
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,672

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Talent Level

    The Pacers finished just about where they should in terms of talent. We have one All-Star who is great but not a superstar, some rookies who will be good but are still developing, and a bunch of relatively mediocre veterans. That's not going to get you really far in the NBA.

    We're basically like a not-so-good version of the Miami Heat, their All-Star is a superstar unlike ours, and Beasley (their rookie) probably has much more talent or at least firepower at this point than any of our rookies.

    And by talent do you mean better because there are a lot of players in the NBA who are talented that don't make their team that much better.

  3. #3
    Member naptownmenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    4,642

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Talent Level

    I chose, in no particular order:

    Cleveland
    Orlando
    Boston
    Atlanta
    Chicago
    Miami (only because of Wade)

    I think Indiana is as talented or more talented than the other teams mentioned. That's including Philadelphia and New Jersey.
    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Larry is not coming back, he didn't have a meeting with Orlando for not reason, yeah he is coming back to the NBA but not to the Pacers, the notion that he is a taking a year off and then come back is absurd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    GOOD GOD THAT'S LARRY BIRD'S MUSIC!

  4. #4
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,854

    Default Re: Talent Level

    I question how people say one team has more talent than another.

    For example - the Cavs IMO because they have Lebron James has a talent advantage over the Pacers. I don't care who else is on the Cavs - James is soooooo good, he alone tilts the scales. So comparing two teams by going position by position and saying OK Pacers have advantage at 3 positions and the Cavs at two - that is meaningless.

    The other thing that is just wrong about going position by position comes into play with the Sixers vs the Pacers. Pacers have better shooters, better offensive players, but how do you figure in overall athleticism, quickness....

    You also run into problems with potential vs veterans. Is Hibbert more talented than Foster - yeah - but Foster is a much more important player to winning right now - to say nothing about this past November and January.

    Not that I have the answer in judging talent - but I first look at best player vs best player and 9 out of 10 times the team with the better "best player" IMO is more talented. I judge best or better player by the impact he has on winning. Granger was the 5th leading scoer- but he was not near the 5th best player in the NBA - not to pick on Danny

    The only teams I think that don't out-talent the Pacers:
    Wizards - Also with Gil - they might
    Nets - Although with VC and DH - they might
    Toronto -
    Charlotte
    New York -

    Every other team on the list IMO has more talent. The Bucks IMO are more talented.

    Really I think I could make a pretty good argument that the only team in the whole NBA that the Pacers clearly and by any reasonable measure have more talent than is the Kings.

    Edit - I am basing this on this past season - not the future
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-20-2009 at 02:27 PM.

  5. #5
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,562

    Default Re: Talent Level

    I watched just some snippets of games this weekend, but I really found myself thinking that they are that far off any of the East teams other than a healthy Boston, Cleveland, and Orlando.

    With Cleveland and Orlando they just happen to have two of the best 5 players in the game respectively in Dwight Howard and LeBron James.

    I don't seeing huge difference in the entire rest of the East, all of teams not in those first 3 have glaring weaknesses in my opinion. I probably like Chicago a hair better, but I have felt that way even prior to Derrick Rose, so he kind of really puts them over the top.

    Relative to the Pacers, they've legitimately played with all of those team, I've thought.

    The Boston, Orlando, and Cleveland wins were great, but you have to say that was really just a great night each time.

    As for the other 11 teams, I don't think there is one of them that a healthy Pacers team wouldn't at least be competitive in, in a 7 game series.

    This is April obviously, but the Pacers HAVE to make the playoffs next year for a million reasons, but mostly to see where you stand against these other teams in the big picture when the bright lights come on.

  6. #6
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,562

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I question how people say one team has more talent than another.

    For example - the cavs IMO because they have Lebron James has a talent advantage over the pacers. I don't care who eslse is on the Cavs - james is soooooo good, he alone tilts the scales. So comparing two teams by going position by position and saying OK Pacers have advantage at 3 positions and the Cavs at two - that is meaningless.

    The other thing that is just wrong about going position by position comes into play with the Sixers vs the Pacers. Pacers have better shooters, better offensive players, but how do you figure in overall athleticism, quickness....

    You also run into problems with potential vs veterans. Is Hibbert more talented than Foster - yeah - but Foster is a much more important player to winning right now - to say nothing about November and January.

    Not that I have to the answer in judging talent - but I first look at best player vs best player and 9 out of 10 times the team with the better "best player" IMO is more talented.

    This is a good point. It's hard to break it down by position and come out with the better team. I think the Pacers gave a game to almost everyone they faced this year, which is good and bad. It means they are far off from being one of the better ones of that group, but not far from being the worst too.

    I would guess if the main group of players are here next year and Obie doesn't do a 180 with the schemes, you'll see a pretty dramatic positive result against some of these teams.

  7. #7
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I question how people say one team has more talent than another.

    For example - the cavs IMO because they have Lebron James has a talent advantage over the pacers. I don't care who eslse is on the Cavs - james is soooooo good, he alone tilts the scales. So comparing two teams by going position by position and saying OK Pacers have advantage at 3 positions and the Cavs at two - that is meaningless.

    The other thing that is just wrong about going position by position comes into play with the Sixers vs the Pacers. Pacers have better shooters, better offensive players, but how do you figure in overall athleticism, quickness....

    You also run into problems with potential vs veterans. Is Hibbert more talented than Foster - yeah - but Foster is a much more important player to winning right now - to say nothing about November and January.

    Not that I have to the answer in judging talent - but I first look at best player vs best player and 9 out of 10 times the team with the better "best player" IMO is more talented.
    I agree with almost everything you're saying.

    How do you evaluate talent in a possible Cavs vs. Lakers matchup? I happen to think that LeBron is better than Kobe (I don't even think it's all that close, frankly). But I also think that Gasol and Odom are more talented than anyone on Cleveland's roster. As a whole, there's little doubt in my mind that the Lakers are a more talented collection of players.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  8. #8
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,854

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is April obviously, but the Pacers HAVE to make the playoffs next year for a million reasons, but mostly to see where you stand against these other teams in the big picture when the bright lights come on.
    That is sooo true - you really don't know a player until you see them in the playoffs. Look at Reggie - without the playoffs - he doesn't make the HOF, his deserved reputation is completely different. The regular season is only there as a primer for the playoffs.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Talent Level

    somebody explain to me how exactly washington does not have more talent AND potential than the pacers...

  10. #10
    Member idioteque's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    washington dc
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,672

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by mellifluous View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with almost everything you're saying.

    How do you evaluate talent in a possible Cavs vs. Lakers matchup? I happen to think that LeBron is better than Kobe (I don't even think it's all that close, frankly). But I also think that Gasol and Odom are more talented than anyone on Cleveland's roster. As a whole, there's little doubt in my mind that the Lakers are a more talented collection of players.
    I agree with you, but I don't think the gap between the role players of the Lakers and that of the role players of Cleveland is enough to make the Lakers better than Cleveland. LeBron is just that good.

    Besides, Big Z, Delonte West, Mo Williams, and Varejao aren't bad players. Even Joe Smith, Wally Z, Gibson, and Ben Wallace have their moments. They're much deeper than they were the last time they made the Finals. Sasha Pavolic, who had a big role on their NBA Finals team, is probably their 11th or so man now.

    When you look at the Lakers beyond their starters, the only two guys on their bench I would even covet are Lamar Odom and maybe Sasha Vujacic. Farmar can be a good backup PG but he is banged up right now. They are relatively thin now and the Cavs can go much deeper into their bench.
    Last edited by idioteque; 04-20-2009 at 02:33 PM.

  11. #11
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,854

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by mellifluous View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with almost everything you're saying.

    How do you evaluate talent in a possible Cavs vs. Lakers matchup? I happen to think that LeBron is better than Kobe (I don't even think it's all that close, frankly). But I also think that Gasol and Odom are more talented than anyone on Cleveland's roster. As a whole, there's little doubt in my mind that the Lakers are a more talented collection of players.
    Not to get off topic, but that is why I think Lebron is the MVP over Kobe - Kobe has better players on his team vs the Cavs.

    Overall I think the Lakers are the most talented team in the NBA. Cavs aren't too far behind. But on the other end of the spectrum - a team like the Clippers with Camby, Baron Davis, Zack Randolph, Kaman, Al Thorton, Eric Gordon, Ricky Davis - that is at least in the top half of the league talent wise
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-20-2009 at 02:34 PM.

  12. #12
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Really I think I could make a pretty good argument that the only team in the whole NBA that the Pacers clearly and by any reasonable measure have more talent than is the Kings.
    I'd certainly add a couple teams to your list, especially if you don't project into the future and just look at the past season. The bottom feeders are obvious: Minnesota, Memphis, OKC. I also think it's pretty clear that we're more talented than the Knicks.

    There's 3 categories really: Cleary worse than the Pacers, On par with the Pacers, Clearly better than the Pacers

    Clearly Worse:
    Sacramento, Minnesota, Memphis, OKC, New York

    Clearly Better:
    Boston, Cleveland, Orlando, Atlanta, San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, New Orleans, Denver, Portland, Utah, LA Lakers, LA Clippers, Phoenix
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  13. #13
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by croz24 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    somebody explain to me how exactly washington does not have more talent AND potential than the pacers...
    When healthy, they have 3 players who are very clearly better than anyone on the Pacers other than Granger.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  14. #14
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,854

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by croz24 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    somebody explain to me how exactly washington does not have more talent AND potential than the pacers...
    I couldn't make a strong argument - except to say Gilbert is injured. When he is healthy and when Haywood is healthy - they are more talented

  15. #15
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,854

    Default Re: Talent Level

    Quote Originally Posted by mellifluous View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'd certainly add a couple teams to your list, especially if you don't project into the future and just look at the past season. The bottom feeders are obvious: Minnesota, Memphis, OKC. I also think it's pretty clear that we're more talented than the Knicks.

    There's 3 categories really: Cleary worse than the Pacers, On par with the Pacers, Clearly better than the Pacers

    Clearly Worse:
    Sacramento, Minnesota, Memphis, OKC, New York

    Clearly Better:
    Boston, Cleveland, Orlando, Atlanta, San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, New Orleans, Denver, Portland, Utah, LA Lakers, LA Clippers, Phoenix
    I can't argue with you. Although the Wolves, Grizz, and Thunder each have some talented young players - IMO the Kings don't even have that. IMO the Kings are in their own category then

  16. #16
    Member idioteque's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    washington dc
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,672

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Talent Level

    I would definitely agree that right now we have more talent than Memphis and OKC. Both teams have some great young players, yes, and Durant will end up most likely being better than Granger, but they have no real veterans whatsoever. Who is the best veteran on OKC, probably either Nenad Kristic or Desmond Mason, yikes. With Memphis it is even worse, their best veteran is probably either Hakim Warrick or Darko. Neither team has a veteran with near the ability of Jack, Ford, or Murphy, and their young players aren't as effective as they will be yet.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,370

    Default Re: Talent Level

    I think an interesting parallel question would be: which teams would you trade rosters with?

    A few of the teams we are saying are more talented, I wouldn't... than again, a few we are saying are less talented, I would. Thinking of it this way, the idea of "talent" becomes even murkier.

    I would trade our roster for OKC's. I would not trade our roster for Toronto's.

    Yet, I think most people would agree Toronto has a more talented roster than OKC.

Similar Threads

  1. Pacers talent level is in the bottom 5 right now
    By Unclebuck in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 12-23-2008, 01:46 PM
  2. Bird wants more talent around Granger
    By MillerTime in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-02-2008, 08:07 AM
  3. Will the Pacers make the playoffs?
    By 2minutes twowa in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 07-14-2008, 04:12 PM
  4. Colts quietly stockpile talent in draft
    By McClintic Sphere in forum Indianapolis Colts
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-27-2008, 05:14 PM
  5. Top Draft Prospects
    By Will Galen in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-18-2008, 11:41 PM

Posting Permissions

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