Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 252

Thread: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    What you see is what you get. The Pacers will remain for the most part with the players you see now for the next 5 years and they will not compete for a championship. They have a ceiling below championship contention, and the Pacers front office doesn’t have the foresight to see our Pacers’ limited potential.

    Quick note- I don’t intend this as a negative outlook on the Pacers future. Believe it or not, I’m relatively happy with the Pacers’ offseason moves and I look forward to watching some of our young guys develop into real good players. However, that doesn’t keep me from seeing the cold hard truth, and that is this team’s talent level is not on a championship level.

    So just hear me out. No matter what I say in the following, I can promise you the next 5 years are going to be some of the most exciting times in the Pacers’ history and it will be a whole lot of fun to watch.

    It would be hard to look at all the improvement in the Indiana organization over just the last 3 years and come up with a conclusion that this team cannot or won’t compete for a title. But like most things, proper perspective can give us real insight into where this organization is heading.

    It all starts at the top. I don’t necessarily believe the Pacers’ brass aren’t intending on winning as much as possible. I think they very much so are doing everything they can to win. Kevin Pritchard has made some smart moves this offseason drastically improving the bench. It has nothing to do with desire, or a lack of an ability in our team’s front office. They simply don’t realize this team is severely lacking in some areas and unless they make drastic moves at some point in the next few years they’ll never truly compete.

    I’ve never really had a problem with how a front office operates. Whether they’re aggressive, conservative or maybe opportunistic. Whatever you want to call it. As long as they have an understanding of what it takes for a team to beat the absolute best, and the complete understanding that they cannot “sit back and evaluate” until they truly have a team that rivals the absolute best.

    But that’s what our front office has said. Kevin said the following:

    “Coach Vogel wants to keep this team together and see them grow,” Pritchard said. “We’ll look for deals and be opportunistic, but it’s not like we have to do something right now.
    “It’s never done,” he added, “but it’s time to sit back and evaluate where we are.
    I believe there are only three teams in the NBA that truly should simply be happy with the teams they have fielded. OKC, MIA, and LAL. Those three teams are stacked and are looking at an NBA Finals appearance. While OKC, MIA and LAL have different small issues they will be actively looking to fix if the right deals are coming along, all know they’re fielding top tier talent and until some glaring issues become apparent, no moves need to be made.

    This is obviously not the case with the Pacers and even the most positive thinking fellow on this board would agree this team isn’t where they need to be. But there lies the problem. Other than minor upgrades to the bench, the Pacers front office hasn’t made an attempt, or at least welcomed the idea that improvements need to be made for this team to compete.

    Many would argue that we have to allow the team to grow, and when the opportunity arises moves will be made. But again, the brass has clearly stated the starting five will stay as is for the forseeable future.

    This team’s starting five does NOT have a high ceiling. If we were the most positive and optimistic about this team’s future than this is the best we’ll see out of this team:

    George Hill could improve to a very solid starting point guard. Let’s say best case scenario Hill is a top 15 point guard. I mean that’s being honest. He’s not going to be handing out assists like Nash, and he’s not going to be exploding to the basket like Westbrook. He is who he is. A a solid defender, and a solid, reliable offensive player.

    Paul George could progress to a top 15 player, the second best two guard in the league. Again, that is probably overly optimistic. But let’s imagine he does. 20ppg, and top tier defense is a fair ceiling for PG.

    Granger simply cannot get better than he is now. He’s above average on offense and above average on defense. A real good player.

    This is West no matter how optimistic you are on his future: Average defense at best, poor rebounding and absolutely no shotblocking or protecting the rim. Let’s so he’s very good on offense. (that’s just absolutely inaccurate but we’ll throw him a bone)

    Hibbert is a shotblocker, protects the rim, plays solid defense and is a real good rebounder. He’s average on offense at best.

    That’s your team folks. That is the following, a real strong offense, a strong defense, and average rebounding. That’s pretty good. But bigger teams will out rebound us. Team’s with slashers will exploit our lack of an ability to protect the rim. Great offenses with all world superstars will simply beat our strong but not great defense. That is our team of the future. BEST CASE.

    Now compare that to any of the top three. Let’s go with LAL: They have twin towers protecting the rim, they have probably the best rebounding in the NBA, and they have Nash to help an offense that consists of Kobe, Pau and Howard.

    The only thing the Lakers lack is depth, and a perimeter defense that is probably not a problem considering Howard’s defensive prowess.

    Say what you want about the Lakers good fortune, or good market - whatever it may be, but the real problem is we have a front office that doesn’t at least want to TRY to beat that. No attempt at all.

    The funny thing is this has nothing to do with, as I alluded to before, our front offices general manner of doing business. Whether you refer to that as an aggressive or conservative office. It has everything to do with knowing who they are and the willingness to change it.

    Say what you want about Bird, who is considered much more conservative compared to Kevin Pritchard but Bird had the same idea each year: “Our team isn’t good enough as constructed, so we’ll do what we need to do to fix that.” Do you see how important that is? This could mean Bird, had he still been in charge, ends up making absolutely no big moves this offseason. This has nothing to do with doing a move, to do a move. This has everything to do with our front office recognizing a lack of talent and making it clear they will work to improve that until they can be happy with the talent level.

    I don’t believe it is impossible to compete with LAL, MIA, and OKC. I don’t. I think if you get creative with building a team you can come up with a team that could theoretically beat them. That doesn’t mean they actually end up doing it. But if you can at least field a team that can exploit weakness on those prior teams than you have a chance.

    I’m merely asking our office to have a goal they will work to achieve even if it never happens. I understand because of our market, because of luck or any other possible reasons that may be an impossible goal. Doesn’t matter. Aim for the sky, if you don’t meet it than so be it.

    I just don’t want to be told that the team I’m seeing has a chance to beat Miami, or OKC or LAL. Because they don’t. Plain and simple. And they won’t next year, or the year after, no matter how good Paul George gets. they don’t have that high of a ceiling.

    For those that don’t believe moves can be made to compete with the best, I’ll give you a fictional example of what I think could compete with every team in the NBA. I will not continue to trumpet this idea as if it is the only way to go, or as if this is the best possible example. This is nothing more than a vision I have, for a team that could be formed that would rival any other team in the NBA. Once again the point I’m trying to drive home is not, “Kevin Pritchard should listen to mattie, dumbass drunk boarder on PacersDigest.” It is, Kevin Pritchard should have visions of different scenarios in which a Pacers team could be fielded that can beat anyone.

    Here’s my simple thought- While gathering superstar talent went out of the wayside when the Pacers made no attempt to sign Deron Williams in the offseason, I could see how the Pacers could form an all defensive team that could matchup on any front with any team. A a team that could out rebound any team, protect the rim and make life miserable for guys like Wade and LBJ who’d like a nice free ride to the rim.

    I know the Pacers do have in place at least part of that puzzle. George Hill is a long physical defender at the PG position. Once Paul George puts on a little strength he’ll be an all world, long defender at the two. He’ll truly have the physical capacity to give any two guard in the league fits. Danny Granger is a very physical defender capable of forcing LBJ to settle for jumpshots just because of his strength and good footwork. Roy Hibbert is a strong rebounder and shotblocker able to protect the rim better than just about every NBA player except Ibaka and Dwight Howard.

    That’s a real core there. David West however is a major flaw in that plan. He cannot protect the rim, rebound or play anything above average defense. If David West’s valuable expiring contract is packaged with draft picks and or particular appealing bench players, he could bring back a starting caliber powerforward that could fullfill that necessary role.

    Forget David West’s supposed leadership. Focus what it would take for this team to keep Pau and Dwight Howard off the offensive boards. Imagine if this team had two frontcourt players that kept Russell Westbrook and James Harden from having easy layups and dunks. What would happen if Indiana faced Miami in the post season, and they left Shane Battier on our starting 4, and we beat them so bad on the boards Miami would have to play LBJ at the 4 allowing Granger to score at will?

    That fictional concept of a team could conceivably play against anyone. (In before ******* quotes the prior sentence and ignores everything else I said.)

    My idea as I’ve stated multiple times in various threads is since the rebuilding Hawks have lost out on the Dwight sweepstakes, offer them a package for either one of their 4’s, either Horford or Smith. Obviously Smith would be the best case scenario, but Horford would be amazing as well.

    The sheer size and athleticism and defensive ability displayed by our Pacers would allow us to truly play with any team in the NBA. That’d truly make them like the Pistons before. What people forget is that Pistons team was so great because they could defend ANYONE. They were that great. They didn’t have a superstar that could drop 40, but they could stop anyone, outrebound anyone and one year they were fortunate enough to outscore everyone because of all world defensive play.

    So I’d like to say one last time, I’m not really upset with how things are going. Watching the Pacers make it to the second round is going to be exciting. I think in the next few years Paul George is going to be a really good player. I think he’ll be an allstar. But that’s the teams ceiling.

    Next year when David West is a FA, he’ll be resigned and all of our starting five will be undercontract. DJ will be replaced by another backup point guard. Maybe a slightly superior one, maybe not. Lance could become an important contributor that is fun to watch, or he could go the way of Brandon Rush. You’ll see other various moves that change up the bench from year to year. But as said before, this is our team of the future and they aren’t getting much better.

    That is all.


    *Cliff notes

    The Pacers front office will not make any moves in the next 5 years to change the current starting lineup. The current starting lineup will never be good enough to beat the top teams in the NBA.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mattie For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Lifelong Pacer Fan. PGisthefuture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,614

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    You never know, we could make a big move if it presents itself in the next 5 years. I mean look at what Philly just did, I could see us do something similar at some point in the next 5 years if the team doesn't improve. Also, there is still a chance Larry comes back after this year sometime. Another thing is that you never know if one of the major teams in the league could lose a star player due to injury kind of like the Bulls this year. Heck, we don't even know if Dwight will be a Laker next year.

  4. #3
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by PGisthefuture View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You never know, we could make a big move if it presents itself in the next 5 years. I mean look at what Philly just did, I could see us do something similar at some point in the next 5 years if the team doesn't improve. Also, there is still a chance Larry comes back after this year sometime. Another thing is that you never know if one of the major teams in the league could lose a star player due to injury kind of like the Bulls this year. Heck, we don't even know if Dwight will be a Laker next year.
    True. I'm hoping I'm wrong, and we try something. Point is, based off of Donnie's expressed goal for the future. The team is staying as is.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

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


  6. #4
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Again, I'll I'd ever ask for, and people who agree with me would ask for is some sort of vision. As an example the Colts in 99 2000 realized they have the QB of the future. Forgetting how lucky that is, they could have done very little and allowed Manning to have a Dan Marino like career. They didn't though. They fired their coach and hired the best defensive coach in the NFL. They had a vision. It worked. They were lucky. The point was they tried.

    The Pacers could make the same effort, and if we never win, that's life. But at least an effort is made.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mattie For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    Member yoadknux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Israel
    Age
    23
    Posts
    1,320

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    The FO/ownership are fine with being good and not excellent. Most of the rumors about the departure of Bird say that our owner didn't want to spend. So I guess someone up there just wants us to make the playoffs and do what we can.

    I understand that you're not happy us being pretenders, but you can't have a "contend or bust" attitude. After sucking for so long, you just wanna build a team that would make the playoffs, give the state a show, and go home.

    You also have to understand that sometimes there are just no good moves out there. Maybe we did try to get Nash. Maybe we were working on a trade to get some point guard, but it fell apart. You can't know for sure.

    Taking the next step from here though, I don't think it's possible anymore. We don't have the cap space for it. I think we should have traded for a point guard, but instead we gave Hill his dream contract. The Smith/Horford deal you suggested isn't practical because 1) We don't have the money for it and 2) There's no real way to get them for free next to the other 4 starters.

    You just have to see how the current team goes. They probably won't contend, but hey, I'd take the #3/#4 seed over our #9-11 recent history.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piston Prince
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to yoadknux For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by yoadknux View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The FO/ownership are fine with being good and not excellent. Most of the rumors about the departure of Bird say that our owner didn't want to spend. So I guess someone up there just wants us to make the playoffs and do what we can.

    I understand that you're not happy us being pretenders, but you can't have a "contend or bust" attitude. After sucking for so long, you just wanna build a team that would make the playoffs, give the state a show, and go home.

    You also have to understand that sometimes there are just no good moves out there. Maybe we did try to get Nash. Maybe we were working on a trade to get some point guard, but it fell apart. You can't know for sure.

    Taking the next step from here though, I don't think it's possible anymore. We don't have the cap space for it. I think we should have traded for a point guard, but instead we gave Hill his dream contract. The Smith/Horford deal you suggested isn't practical because 1) We don't have the money for it and 2) There's no real way to get them for free next to the other 4 starters.

    You just have to see how the current team goes. They probably won't contend, but hey, I'd take the #3/#4 seed over our #9-11 recent history.
    The difference between Horford or Smith's contract and West is 2million. As long as their plan is load up draft picks and get rid of one of their redundant 4's, it'd be quite easy to make the salaries matchup. If they wanted another expiring and lots of draft picks they could dump Horford on us and refuse to resign West in the offseason. It's possible.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  11. #7
    Undefeated
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Carmel
    Age
    37
    Posts
    988

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Interesting post, and in many ways I agree with you. The big problem is that there are a lot of teams in the league, and very few have the chance to get good enough to compete for the title. Defense may be the way to go, but I think the Pacers need to ensure they have flexibility to be able to morph parts of the team. Two things happened this off-season I didn't like because they seem to cement us to mediocrity: drafting Plumlee (who could end up being a good value pick and contributor, but the pick also doesn't have the chance to seriously improve the team. We picked a guy we think will be our third string center for the next FOUR years.) and signing Hill (have no problem signing him, don't even really mind overpaying him, but wish the contract was not five years. that's to much money tied up for too long.)
    Danger Zone

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Rogco For This Useful Post:


  13. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    That was not a hard prediction to do, good post though, as we know the Pacers are known for keeping their players until they are so hurt that they can't move so I expect West to be re-signed for 3 or 4 more years and then the year after that I expect Danny to be re-signed for another 3 or 4 years, Hill and Hibbert have 5 years left in their contracts and Paul George will get an extension for sure, so like you said I don't expect the Pacers to win anything in the next five years.

  14. #9
    Get well PG! QuickRelease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    4,765

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by Rogco View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Interesting post, and in many ways I agree with you. The big problem is that there are a lot of teams in the league, and very few have the chance to get good enough to compete for the title. Defense may be the way to go, but I think the Pacers need to ensure they have flexibility to be able to morph parts of the team. Two things happened this off-season I didn't like because they seem to cement us to mediocrity: drafting Plumlee (who could end up being a good value pick and contributor, but the pick also doesn't have the chance to seriously improve the team. We picked a guy we think will be our third string center for the next FOUR years.) and signing Hill (have no problem signing him, don't even really mind overpaying him, but wish the contract was not five years. that's to much money tied up for too long.)
    Who had star upside after the Plumlee? Moultrie maybe? PJ3? I don't see any franchise altering players we should have taken instead of Plumlee. There may be better players than him, but none that catapult us out of mediocrity. I like the George Hill signing, and doubt it anchors the team in a bad place.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to QuickRelease For This Useful Post:


  16. #10
    Indiana Pacers Forever Pacer Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    ya
    Posts
    3,817
    Mood

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    This team can do it and I feel sorry for you because you don't believe in our team.

    Go Pacers
    .

    Frank Vogel says "Killer instinct, start strong, build a lead and then step on their throats."

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pacer Fan For This Useful Post:


  18. #11
    Member Dr. Awesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    4,247

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    You know who else won't win a Championship in the next 5 years? At least 27 other teams, potentially/probably less.

  19. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Awesome For This Useful Post:


  20. #12
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You know who else won't win a Championship in the next 5 years? At least 27 other teams, potentially/probably less.
    I said compete. not win. Compete. There is a huge difference. Considering how close the Pacers are, if they had the right mindset they could compete. We've already seen the Pacers in the last 15 years compete for three championships. That Doctor, was awesome.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mattie For This Useful Post:


  22. #13
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I said compete. not win. Compete. There is a huge difference. Considering how close the Pacers are, if they had the right mindset they could compete. We've already seen the Pacers in the last 15 years compete for three championships. That Doctor, was awesome.
    I am curious to know what you see as competing for a championship. What threes years did the pacers compete for one? what do you have to do to be in the classification as competing for a championship

  23. #14
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I am curious to know what you see as competing for a championship. What threes years did the pacers compete for one? what do you have to do to be in the classification as competing for a championship
    I stated above one possible example of how the Pacers could remain almost as is and compete for a championship.

    I'm sure my definition of "competing" would differ with many people on this board. Obviously that's not the type of the thing that everyone can agree on. But I think we can all agree that we'll know it when we see it.

    97-98 was the year I'd say the Pacers were the closest to a championship. They had offensive fire power. They could go to an all defensive lineup that could shut down anyone. They had rebounders, scorers, defenders. They were stacked really. They didn't win but I think very few historians would say they didn't have a shot at a title.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  24. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,654

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Mattie -

    You're absolutely killing me. You are sucking the air right out of my room. You see, I'm 60 years old and I have very few remaining on my bucket list. One of the most important for me, one that I have absolutely no control over, is seeing the Pacers win an NBA championship before my days are done.

    First off, you've given us an extremely well written position. I've understood your position for some time, but this serves very well to summarize your viewpoint. However, I don't agree with the lack of faith that you have in TPTB.

    The reason I say this is that I can understand and can certainly accept their rationale for making the moves that they have made this summer. I could easily join in with those that feel we may have overpaid for some of the deals that were made, but I really don't take exception with the personnel retained or acquired, or the reasoning behind it.

    I break a game into about 3 components. Game initiation/start, mid-game (perhaps further broken into Q2 and Q3/early Q4) and end-game situations.

    Quite frankly, once the move was change was made to start Hill (with Collison's injury) and to stick with him (even after Collison returned), I don't believe that anyone can reasonably argue the point that our starting lineup was not capable of playing with anyone in the league in game start (Q1) situations. I think the scoreboard has proven that point.

    Our early leads were often lost in late Q1/early Q2 when there were usually 3-4 bench players on the floor along with one starter. It was then not uncommon to see the starting unit either rebuild a lead or play back to even by halftime once they were re-inserted into the game in Q2. Starting the second half, our starters sometimes built leads or held their own.

    The only time that I can sometimes take exception to the performance of our starters would be in end-game situations (last 5 minutes) against the best of the best. The better teams have more talented star players that focus better in end-game situations. And, I cannot disagree when the top players of the best teams are playing more focused, they more often than not can get the better of even our starting players.

    So, I see the challenges for the Pacers being the strength of their bench and what they provide as a unit when the starters are out of the game in late Q1 and late Q3 situations, and the performance of even our best players in late game situations.

    I honestly believe that that TPTB believes that they have addressed both needs. Is it unreasonable to believe that the overall performance of this team would be improved by improving the talent and capabilities of the bench players that come onto the floor in late Q1/late Q3? Is it really unreasonable to believe that Hibbert and George will continue to improve or that West will perform better as he further heals, thereby perhaps providing even more cushion to help the subs maintain leads that our starters have built? I believe this is where the TPTB took a position as one solution and that I really can't argue against the position that they took. It is reasonable and was probably the easiest solution to execute.

    I believe that by retaining our starters, we have a unit that will perform no worse than they performed late last year. And, if George, Hibbert and West do improve, the starting unit building comfortable Q1 leads will be the norm. A better bench that can maintain those leads will eventually lead to opponents starters having to play more minutes in an attempt to overcome those leads.

    That takes us to late-game situations. Hopefully the extra minutes players by the opponents starters will help our starters in their attempt to perform better in the final minutes of games against the leagues best players. If not, then I believe that definite needs will reveal themselves to TPTB. You could be very correct in that the Pacers will need to replace West with a player that is better suited to defend the paint in late game situations. If that is the case, then I hope by then that someone else becomes much better at providing scoring in end game situations, because right now I believe that West is the most consistent scorer we have in those situations.

    As for our starting unit being as is for 5 years, I just don't see it. Even with a top-performing team like we had in the late 90s, that has never been the case. I don't see it now. First off, West will be a free agent and I don't see the Pacers paying him the type of money that it might take to retain him, which is probably about what he is making now. The only way would be if West will give us a break due to an enjoyment he has in playing with this team or due to some new-found loyalty he might have. But playing him his present dollars would only set us up for team salary difficulties when have to renegotiate with Granger and George.

    I believe that this season is put up or shut up time for Paul George. If he does not elevate his game quite a bit this year, the Pacers might even go a different direction at SG. Who knows.... maybe by acquiring a new PG and moving Hill to SG. But at any rate, if tinkering with the roster through rebuilding the bench is not the answer, I don't believe TPTB will hesitate for a moment to look at attempting to bring in a new starter or two.

  25. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to beast23 For This Useful Post:


  26. #16

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    I don't care if the Pacers win a Championship. So many people refer to the team as "we" but if they win, I don't get a share of the money or a trophy or any credit for the victories. I'm a basketball fan and the Pacers are the pro franchise in my city, which is great because it means I get to see pro hoops a lot. To that end, what I need the Pacers to do in exchange for my money is present a good product. The 2011/2012 team was a good product and it looks like a good product should be on the court for several years to come. I'm going to enjoy that while I can.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Banta For This Useful Post:


  28. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by Banta View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't care if the Pacers win a Championship. So many people refer to the team as "we" but if they win, I don't get a share of the money or a trophy or any credit for the victories. I'm a basketball fan and the Pacers are the pro franchise in my city, which is great because it means I get to see pro hoops a lot. To that end, what I need the Pacers to do in exchange for my money is present a good product. The 2011/2012 team was a good product and it looks like a good product should be on the court for several years to come. I'm going to enjoy that while I can.
    Quoting this post to prove the point I was trying to make yesterday on the other thread, some people are just happy to "compete".

  29. #18
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    By the way I'll list people who fielded teams JUST last year who could have conceivably won: Memphis, Chicago, San Antonio, LAL, Miami, and OKC. That's just last year. Every team I listed had something they brought to the table that could exploit any other team. Memphis had defense and a dominate front court. LA had three superstars, OKC and Miami both had their big three, San Antonio had one of the most explosive offenses ever. Chicago had defense and Rose.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  30. #19
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,011

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    By the way I'll list people who fielded teams JUST last year who could have conceivably won: Memphis, Chicago, San Antonio, LAL, Miami, and OKC. That's just last year. Every team I listed had something they brought to the table that could exploit any other team. Memphis had defense and a dominate front court. LA had three superstars, OKC and Miami both had their big three, San Antonio had one of the most explosive offenses ever. Chicago had defense and Rose.
    So a team that lost in the first round is a championship contender, but the Pacers are not? I'm just trying to figure out how you define what a "contender" is, because there's something a little off with this.

  31. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  32. #20
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    By the way I'll list people who fielded teams JUST last year who could have conceivably won: Memphis, Chicago, San Antonio, LAL, Miami, and OKC. That's just last year. Every team I listed had something they brought to the table that could exploit any other team. Memphis had defense and a dominate front court. LA had three superstars, OKC and Miami both had their big three, San Antonio had one of the most explosive offenses ever. Chicago had defense and Rose.

    Memphis? The same team that lost in the first round? I would not put them in the category as a team that could have won a championship.

  33. #21
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Memphis? The same team that lost in the first round? I would not put them in the category as a team that could have won a championship.
    Why do I have to say anything? Did we forget their best players injury kept him playing on the bench 1 week before the playoffs?
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  34. #22
    Since 1984 1984's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,811

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Troll.
    Last edited by 1984; 08-17-2012 at 02:46 PM.

  35. #23
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    19,002

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    By the way I'll list people who fielded teams JUST last year who could have conceivably won: Memphis, Chicago, San Antonio, LAL, Miami, and OKC. That's just last year. Every team I listed had something they brought to the table that could exploit any other team. Memphis had defense and a dominate front court. LA had three superstars, OKC and Miami both had their big three, San Antonio had one of the most explosive offenses ever. Chicago had defense and Rose.
    There's nothing that Memphis has that the Pacers don't.

  36. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There's nothing that Memphis has that the Pacers don't.
    If by "nothing" you mean every other position but shooting guard I guess you are right........

  37. #25
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    26
    Posts
    30,874

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If by "nothing" you mean every other position but shooting guard I guess you are right........
    How did we win more games than them and make it farther in the playoffs then? Maybe Vogel is just that good.

    That being said Gay vs. Granger is a lot closer than most people would say. Randolph vs. West this year was pretty much a wash. I'll take Roy over Marc Gasol....Maybe there's not a huge difference, but I would take our rosters over Memphis. To act like the rest of their starting 5 is clearly superior to ours other than shooting guard is just not true IMO

    “WE NEVER SURRENDER, WE NEVER GIVE UP, WE KEEP ATTACKING”- Frank Vogel
    momentarygodsblog.com https://twitter.com/momentarygods

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 07:31 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-17-2011, 09:20 PM
  3. Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol think FC Barcelona could compete [ESPN]
    By RoboHicks in forum NBA Headlines (RSS Feeds)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-07-2010, 09:40 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 06:20 PM
  5. Pacers 100-1 to win next years NBA championship.
    By Will Galen in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-03-2009, 09:08 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
  •