I'm not going to claim credit for this "analogy" as someone else came up with it in the big Hibbert thread. I don't disagree that the Pacers will face a backlash if Hibbert is not retained. My personal opinion is that he's not worth anywhere near a max contract, but they're kind of screwed either way and I think they have no choice but to keep him. I don't think Simon/Walsh/Pritchard will have the balls not to match the offer sheet if it's signed.
Back to the question though....is a nucleus of Hill-George-Granger-West-Hibbert going to get us any further than the second round anytime in the next 4-5 years?