I think that we are an example of catching lightning in a bottle with our current roster...beamed for OKC really... Both are possible ways to build a contender, but neither are guaranteed... I don't think one way is more effective/efficient than the other... Outside of the big markets, you have to do one or the other b/c you are unable to buy the top talent... The Pacers were built similarly in the 90/2000's which lead to a contending team nearly annually...
And do you think that the Heat is not a super-team that could topple and draw new viewers in? I mean the Dallas series had a 10.6 to the Thunder series of 10.2. And while they weren't an 11.4, I think the Heat is more established as a superteam. I think it can happen. Most likely not with the Pacers because of market size. That and the Pistons were a dynasty in the NBA and in the last 20 years.
But there could be a team that can break that 11.4 mark. I agree that the Pacers are most likely not that. But that doesn't mean that they can't be successful in the NBA (which I know you are not arguing). Their mold is a viable one. And it is a lesson that you can find success in this league through more ways than tanking.
Tanking does have a better success rate I would argue though. Tanking or bottoming out, lottery picks are the best way to win. But it does not come risk free.
And here is a list of "the Pistons way":
Billups (3rd pick overall)
Hamilton (7th pick overall)
Ben Wallace (undrafted)
Prince (23rd overall)
Rasheed Wallace (4th pick overall)
OK so out of the 5 Pistons starters 3 were high draft picks, they also had Darko (2nd pick overall), imagine if instead of Darko they got either Wade, Melo or Bosh? call me crazy but the "Pistons way" is harder to pull off than the "OKC way".
What finding former lottery picks that either burned their bridges, never matured, or were given away for trash...and then having them gel together and become what they were drafted to do...together...united. Yeah that seems a lot harder than tanking and waiting on your superstars to grow.
I don't think there's a Pacers way of building.
What Larry did is extremely difficult. Having tons of patience, drafting guys that are winners/solid basketball players/good people/team-oriented players, and building a team that is sufficient in many categories (e.g. length, size, shooting, speed, iq) but weak in few with only one top-10 draft pick, and that is a #10 pick, is nearly impossible.
Who here thought we could do this with a #10, #13, #17, #17 and #40 while signing a #18 and trading for a #26? Maybe Warren Buffett reads PD, but I doubt there are many others.
*edit*- Vogel and staff deserve a lot of credit too. I knew we had playoff caliber talent even when O'Brien was here, but it still takes a good staff to recognize how to effectively use players, and an even better staff to make a team that is greater than the sum of its parts.
Last edited by imawhat; 02-06-2013 at 11:08 AM.
Paul Georges don't grow on trees.
Last edited by Cousy47; 02-06-2013 at 11:01 AM.
We still have a weak bench :<, besides the center position, and a hit/miss Hans, the rest are lacking. We'll see what happens if/when Lance moves to the 6th man role.
"I like our group of people," Ainge told USA Today. "I'm trying to teach them about basketball, and they're trying to teach me about analytics."
Frank Vogel says "Killer instinct, start strong, build a lead and then step on their throats."
"I had to take her down like Chris Brown."
I hope nobody follows the "Pacers way", that was painful to watch, the "Pacers way" is also hard to pull it off, the Bucks are trying to do the same thing and they are just mediocre and The Bobcats tried and failed.
For every OKC, there's 20 years of the Clippers wallowing away with their countless lottery picks. Each has it's benefits, each has it's drawbacks.
In all honesty, we are spoiled, we went through about 4 or 5 years of being terrible and we act like we wandered the desert for years. Compared to Clippers fans, Cavs fans, Grizzlies fans, Charlotte fans, Orlando fans, I could go on, but I'll stop, the point is we're really actually pretty lucky. We had 15+ years straight of playoff caliber teams following by 5 or so years of being down. That's not too bad at all in the sports world.
And it's funny that the year they tanked was the year they got a low value asset.