Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 101 to 120 of 120

Thread: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

  1. #101
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Side
    Posts
    4,133

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Sure. This thread though is about building a team. The Pistons were built with savvy drafting and trades. Hard-nosed defense. Team play, rebounding. Good coaching. Relatively low star power. Same as the 90s Pacers. Hell, both teams had the same coach for large stretches of their runs. That's all I'm saying is that the Pacers did this before the Pistons did, the Pistons just got 2 games farther (Indy lost 4-2 to LA). It was an extremely similar run. And I'd say that the current version of the Pacers is really doing the exact same thing again as that 90's team. We're built very similarly.... but I'd say this time around we're using savvy drafting way more than the first time.
    And the Bucks did the same thing in the 80s. I mean, check out their records in that decade under Don Nelson and Del Harris.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/

    So, maybe Milwaukee started this way to build a team in the 80s.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to shags For This Useful Post:


  3. #102
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,063

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My point is, you told them to draft Brandon Rush first. He was higher on Bird's priority list. Had Toronto turned down the deal, Indiana likely would have taken Rush 11th.

    If Bird believed he was worth taking at #11, he would have seen to it that Hibbert would be taken 13th and not 17th, regardless of where he thought Hibbert would actually land. That's definitely a trade acquisition in my book.

    Likewise, I count Kobe as a trade acquisition, rather than a Laker draft pick.
    I get your logic here. No problem. But I would just lump acquisitions like Hibbert in the draft category, as all those types are players never before seen on an NBA floor. "True" trades and free agent pickups are known commodities. Two very different categories for acquiring players.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “People talk about how quiet he [McKey] is, but he’s really been helpful. He gives a lot of insight to players in how to guard certain teams and what their weaknesses are. The whole team listens to him, and it makes my job a lot easier. Having players like him is what pro basketball is all about for me.” —Larry Brown

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to McKeyFan For This Useful Post:


  5. #103
    The Doctor's In The House TheDon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Age
    30
    Posts
    4,577

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by owl View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I dont think too many tears are going to be shed about that.
    Teachers and many other professions are neither.
    Lebron needs to start his one man league.
    Agreed lets feel bad for the big baby cause ultimately it was his decision to end up in the situation he is in, and now all of a sudden he feels he's underpaid? somebody call the waaahmbulance.

  6. #104
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,618

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    The Pacers built perhaps the best team in the East with 5 ECF appearances over 7 years ending with a 6 game Finals team without tanking OR signing a big FA.

    Then the Pacers made TWO TRADES and took that Finals team minus 3 guys (Jax, Dale, Rik) and made it the #1 team in the NBA by record, and please note this also included the best record vs West teams only, and they did it without even missing the playoffs. And they made the playoffs prior to the Ron deal. And even after the Ron trade you could hindsight and say that had they traded Ron and kept Brad that they might have been able to still be a #1 team with Carlisle coaching.


    So the Pacers have already made this brilliant example twice, and yet I still have to read stuff even like your OP that suggests that somehow the one fanbase that should be intimately aware of how this can work actually thinks that they never have a chance and the NBA hates them.

    When have the Pacers FAILED TO BUILD A WINNER without tanking? Only one time - JOB years. And the instant you swapped him for Vogel, in the same freaking season, the team went above 500 and was a playoff team.

    Contrast that with the massive benefits of going up to get Tisdale, McCloud or even Person. Smits panned out but he was never #2 pick good, he was never Ewing, Jordan, Hakeem, Kobe, Shaq good.



    The Pacers played .500 ball and ran off several years "stuck at .500". National writers called them the Indy 500. And then the only thing they did was change coaches. In fact they traded their CURRENT ALL-STAR (Detlef) and immediately made an ECF run. Meaning that the talent had been assembled without tanking. Reggie, Dale and even Detlef/McKey were assembled with picks outside the top 10 or a great trade.



    Draft smart, trade smart, good coach = winning. Always. In the entire league. The Lakers didn't tank to get Kobe or Shaq, keep that in mind. Lopsided trades or cap space. And half their moves to make super teams backfire or at least make them worse than before. Meanwhile the Spurs haven't had a high pick in forever, and that's Duncan. Parker and Manu - nope, very late picks for stars. Hill which got them Leonard, not a high pick either.

  7. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Naptown_Seth For This Useful Post:


  8. #105
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,618

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    And BTW, the Spurs keep disproving the "the NBA wants big market winners" theory and the instant a big market team wins people shout "other teams never have a chance".

    People decide on a theory and then just ignore counter-evidence while waiting for something to prove their point. Then they bring it up with screams of outrage.

    Quote Originally Posted by shags View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And the Bucks did the same thing in the 80s. I mean, check out their records in that decade under Don Nelson and Del Harris.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIL/

    So, maybe Milwaukee started this way to build a team in the 80s.
    See, I agree. The idea or "method" has proven strong over and over. My favorite is "you can't win without a top 5 pick player". Sure, because in the NBA most of the lower picks end up out of the NBA and the other talent gets shifted around till every team has at least 1 top 5 player. The Pacers had Mike Dunleavy and didn't even make the playoffs. Plus those same people will count Kobe as a top 5 because they forget.

    Do you get the star and then win, or do the winner-type players BECOME STARS via their winning? If Kobe never wins a title is he still a guy you can win a title with, or does he earn the rep.

    And what I'm getting at is what I'll now call the Flacco rule - by winning your rep is changed even though you are doing nothing different than you were when people thought less of you. Flacco is not a top 5 QB and he spent most of the playoffs throwing up interception bait high hanging bombs that kept being undefended or poorly defended. The one SB touchdown had his WR come back to the ball because it was underthrown and then the DB went flying past comically to allow a TD that had no biz being a TD. But Flacco gets credit as an elite QB, #1 by Hoge on ESPN a few days later.


    So what this means is that when the Pacers win the title everyone will say "you can't win without a superstar like PG". But if they don't win then PG will have the DG mark of shame - he's just a Robin, not a Batman. Same player with an opinion based more around what his teammates do than what he does.




    * should I tell you how I really feel?
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-06-2013 at 06:23 PM.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Naptown_Seth For This Useful Post:


  10. #106
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,477

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Some definitely tanked, Miami was pretty bad though and still didn't get there. They did OK though haha, Wade was my favorite guy in that draft.
    I too remember a day where I was actually a big Wade fan. I loved watching him take Kentucky out in 2003. I was also a big fan of the Shaq/Wade Heat teams and I rooted hard for them against Detroit in those back to back Conference Finals. But I haven't liked Wade since Lebron has been added to the mix.

  11. #107
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,618

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If by tanking for Duncan you mean the Spurs benefited from David Robinson missing pretty much the whole season then I guess that is tanking, but in reality the team that tanked that year for Duncan was famously Boston who lost the lottery.

    Boston was a really bad team those years they were up high for assets that eventually became KG and Ray.

    Detroit never tanked from my knowledge but Kstat can correct me if he disagrees.
    KG did NOT come from a high asset. The Celtics used Al Jefferson primarily and he was pick 16 I think. Ray was the #5 pick, which happened to become Jeff Green. So had they not made SMART TRADES and instead lived with the benefits of tanking for a high pick then the big 3 would have been Jeff Green, Jefferson and Pierce. Awesome.


    The Bulls not only failed with high picks, but they are also famous losers of the FA world (see NJ, NYK for Lebron as others). They cleared enough space to sign Hill and Duncan and got nothing. Duncan ended up staying in big market San Antonio because, you know, all the big FAs always go off to big cities. Unless they are dime a dozen AS PFs, and then they go to SAS or Indy (West).




    Smart trades do sometimes seem to involve a dumb/complicit team on the other end with suspicious motivation (see Memphis/LAL also). Of course people now revisit the Memphis deal and look at how it's gone with Marc, as well as no playoffs wins while Pau was the star of the team. In fact Memphis also proved that going from a "1 star" team to a multi-headed threat could push you farther in the NBA.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-06-2013 at 06:31 PM.

  12. #108
    yawn cgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Delray Beach, FL
    Age
    30
    Posts
    2,908

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad8888 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hire JOB. Extend JOB. Fire JOB. 'ship.
    It worked for the Celtics. Paul Pierce was #10. Al Jeff was #15. The picks they traded for their big 3 were Randy Foye and Jeff Green.

  13. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    KG did NOT come from a high asset. The Celtics used Al Jefferson primarily and he was pick 16 I think. Ray was the #5 pick, which happened to become Jeff Green. So had they not made SMART TRADES and instead lived with the benefits of tanking for a high pick then the big 3 would have been Jeff Green, Jefferson and Pierce. Awesome.


    The Bulls not only failed with high picks, but they are also famous losers of the FA world (see NJ, NYK for Lebron as others). They cleared enough space to sign Hill and Duncan and got nothing. Duncan ended up staying in big market San Antonio because, you know, all the big FAs always go off to big cities. Unless they are dime a dozen AS PFs, and then they go to SAS or Indy (West).




    Smart trades do sometimes seem to involve a dumb/complicit team on the other end with suspicious motivation (see Memphis/LAL also). Of course people now revisit the Memphis deal and look at how it's gone with Marc, as well as no playoffs wins while Pau was the star of the team. In fact Memphis also proved that going from a "1 star" team to a multi-headed threat could push you farther in the NBA.

    The Celtics were tanking for Oden, they didn't win the lottery and ended up with the 5th pick that they used to get Allen and KG, remember that KG didn't want to go there until he heard that Ray Allen was going to Boston, so tanking in a way got them KG and Ray Allen you want to admit it or not.

    If instead of a 5th overall pick Boston had a 10th pick that trade for Ray Allen doesn't happen and KG would have never go to Boston.

  14. #110
    Formerly PacerFanInAZ Cactus Jax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    4,059
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And BTW, the Spurs keep disproving the "the NBA wants big market winners" theory and the instant a big market team wins people shout "other teams never have a chance".

    People decide on a theory and then just ignore counter-evidence while waiting for something to prove their point. Then they bring it up with screams of outrage.


    See, I agree. The idea or "method" has proven strong over and over. My favorite is "you can't win without a top 5 pick player". Sure, because in the NBA most of the lower picks end up out of the NBA and the other talent gets shifted around till every team has at least 1 top 5 player. The Pacers had Mike Dunleavy and didn't even make the playoffs. Plus those same people will count Kobe as a top 5 because they forget.

    Do you get the star and then win, or do the winner-type players BECOME STARS via their winning? If Kobe never wins a title is he still a guy you can win a title with, or does he earn the rep.

    And what I'm getting at is what I'll now call the Flacco rule - by winning your rep is changed even though you are doing nothing different than you were when people thought less of you. Flacco is not a top 5 QB and he spent most of the playoffs throwing up interception bait high hanging bombs that kept being undefended or poorly defended. The one SB touchdown had his WR come back to the ball because it was underthrown and then the DB went flying past comically to allow a TD that had no biz being a TD. But Flacco gets credit as an elite QB, #1 by Hoge on ESPN a few days later.


    So what this means is that when the Pacers win the title everyone will say "you can't win without a superstar like PG". But if they don't win then PG will have the DG mark of shame - he's just a Robin, not a Batman. Same player with an opinion based more around what his teammates do than what he does.




    * should I tell you how I really feel?
    In a basketball sense, I could kind of compare it to the Dirk Nowitzki effect when he won a title, though he's been a better basketball player than Flacco has been in football. Dirk wasn't considered for much of anything when he was losing in the playoffs and whatnot, but now that he won the title being the man for Dallas, he's a HoF player easily, and people hold him in much higher regard now. I remember that year in the playoffs, Charles Barkley picked against Dallas every round.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

  15. #111
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My point is, you told them to draft Brandon Rush first. He was higher on Bird's priority list. Had Toronto turned down the deal, Indiana likely would have taken Rush 11th.

    If Bird believed he was worth taking at #11, he would have seen to it that Hibbert would be taken 13th and not 17th, regardless of where he thought Hibbert would actually land. That's definitely a trade acquisition in my book.

    Likewise, I count Kobe as a trade acquisition, rather than a Laker draft pick.
    The Toronto trade was known about (and agreed in principle by both teams) BEFORE the Portland trade. In fact, it was known a day ahead of the draft:

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...altraded062508

    It was the Portland deal that we only heard about on ESPN during the draft, not long after we initially took Bayless (turns out we were just doing that for Portland's sake).

    Both Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert were essentially Larry Bird draft picks, though due to technicality neither trade was official until July 1st 2008.

    If you want to say he thought more of Rush than Hibbert at the time, that's fine, because that's obviously true. But both of them were his picks.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  17. #112
    bleed Blue & Gold PacersPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,221

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But with all of that in mind is it possible that teams may start to go another route and try the Pacers way of building through solid draft choices and trying to build a winning culture?

    Or will it always be “we must tank to succeed”?
    It will always be tank too succeed. the majority of most GM's will never have the patience or basketBALLS to state having a "3 year plan" and then basically nail it. we are set for a decade. if everything goes right.

    All I can say is .. Larry Bird brougght the Pacers Franchise back from the grave. Bird may have in fact even saved this State the Franchise.


    BEST GM IN BASKETBALL. I think Legend stuck it to the Celtics .. and Ainge. I believe the Pacers are going to WIN a CHAMPIONSHIP and LEGEND will get his due.

    Fellas... I cannot remember the last time i was earnestly this jacked about the blue and gold. the Obrien regime .. had its purpose.. but it was painful.

    F* C * the NBA. PACERS ARE BACK.


    BOOM BABY ON YOUR FACE STERN



    *
    *
    *

  18. #113
    bleed Blue & Gold PacersPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,221

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by PacersPride View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It will always be tank too succeed. the majority of most GM's will never have the patience or basketBALLS to state having a "3 year plan" and then basically nail it. we are set for a decade. if everything goes right.

    All I can say is .. Larry Bird brougght the Pacers Franchise back from the grave. Bird may have in fact even saved this State the Franchise.


    BEST GM IN BASKETBALL. I think Legend stuck it to the Celtics .. and Ainge. I believe the Pacers are going to WIN a CHAMPIONSHIP and LEGEND will get his due.

    Fellas... I cannot remember the last time i was earnestly this jacked about the blue and gold. the Obrien regime .. had its purpose.. but it was painful.

    F* C * the NBA. PACERS ARE BACK.


    BOOM BABY ON YOUR FACE STERN



    *
    *
    *
    hey is the fact this was my 1666 post on PD some sort of sign from above. i dont want to haveing bad mojo


    can someoone do some Hail Mary's Full of Grace

    for the Blue and Gold

  19. #114
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,685

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What happens if the Pacers actually advance the either the E.C. finals or even the NBA finals? No, I’m not asking if we will all be rejoicing and dancing in the streets (which we better be).

    No I want to know will the paradigm shift in the way people think NBA teams in general and small market teams in particular have to be built?



    But with all of that in mind is it possible that teams may start to go another route and try the Pacers way of building through solid draft choices and trying to build a winning culture?

    Or will it always be “we must tank to succeed”?
    Peck, have you ever read Simmons' book (The Book of Basketball)? One of the best chapters is about "The Secret", which was a summation of a conversation he had with Isaiah Thomas:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/magaz...1228-article21

    5. A big theme of my book is The Secret of winning basketball, something Isiah Thomas explains to me at a topless pool in Las Vegas. (The Secret, in a nutshell: Teams only win titles when their best players forget about statistics, sublimate their own games for the greater good and put their egos on hold.) Another big theme of my book: Kobe Bryant's inability to grasp The Secret. He wanted to win a title, but only on his terms. That's what made him the most fascinating player of his generation. In the book, I even spend three pages comparing him to the wolf in Teen Wolf.


    Fast-forward to a few weeks ago: A reporter asks Kobe if he still has room to grow as a player. Kobe responds, "I do, I do. I think there's so much more to understand. A lot of it just has to do with winning. When you first come into the league, you're trying to prove yourself as an individual, do things to assert yourself and establish yourself. But once you've done that, there's another level to the game that's more complex than figuring out how to put up big numbers as an individual." (That's right, The Secret! He finally gets it! Man, I wish this were in my book.)
    I'm not sure if what you are talking about is so much a large market or small market recipe. I think what we're seeing with this team, is "The Secret" in full effect... and a deliberate attempt to bring on a collection of individuals that buy into this approach in a way that each member of the team complements one another.

    Roy's focus on defending the post.
    Lance's focus on creating offense and adding energy.
    Less emphasis on a point "facilitating the offense" and more emphasis on everyone facilitating easy plays for each other.

    Etc, etc. A collective commitment towards winning basketball.

    There are all kinds of practical signs of this culture in the games that are played. Where we've failed early in the year is when roles were unfilled (Danny going down with an injury before the season's start), people having to step into their role (Augustin's early year struggles), etc.

  20. #115
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,685

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Some of the quotes tonight validate this perspective, it's pretty remarkable given where we were two-three years ago:

    http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=400278441

    "We got in here before the game and we just looked each other in the eyes, and I knew it," George said of a team meeting. "I knew we had to go out, fight for each other, rely on each other and do everything possible to get a win."
    "We got ourselves up for this one in the locker room before the game," West said. "We had to. A lot of guys didn't have a lot out there physically, and we had to lean on each other.

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


  22. #116
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,685

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Some of the quotes tonight validate this perspective, it's pretty remarkable given where we were two-three years ago:

    http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=400278441

    Another:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/...er_Sixers.html

    "They are really good," said Jrue Holiday, who finished 7-for-22 from the floor for 19 points to go along with six rebounds, five turnovers and four assists. "They play within themselves. I think everybody knows their role and they share the ball really well. Just a really solid team, defensively and offensively."

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to docpaul For This Useful Post:


  24. #117
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,930

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Pacers Fans "We have a team that's fun to watch. They are winning. They are getting national TV mentions. We've beaten the Heat. I think we have a great shot of making noise in the playoffs. We can make the ECF. Shoot, we can make the FINALS!!! Go Pacers!!!!"

    Kstat "Yawn"

    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  25. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bball For This Useful Post:


  26. #118
    Since 1984 1984's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,808

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    If there were, it would be called "a Lakers way to ​not build"

  27. #119

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ...damn him for living in a capitalist country. You'd think we lived in a supply-and-demand economy, or something...

    Nobody is shedding tears for LeBron for being worth $100 million when he could easily be worth $200 million. It's just stating a very ironic fact.
    LeBron might well be able to earn $200m currently without salary caps, but putting the league first and having the CBA allows him to be in this position. An ironic fact is without caps, a league in which he earns that much would be unsustainable.

  28. #120

    Default Re: Could there be a Pacers way of building...

    Quote Originally Posted by MAStamper View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Toronto trade was known about (and agreed in principle by both teams) BEFORE the Portland trade. In fact, it was known a day ahead of the draft:

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...altraded062508

    It was the Portland deal that we only heard about on ESPN during the draft, not long after we initially took Bayless (turns out we were just doing that for Portland's sake).

    Both Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert were essentially Larry Bird draft picks, though due to technicality neither trade was official until July 1st 2008.

    If you want to say he thought more of Rush than Hibbert at the time, that's fine, because that's obviously true. But both of them were his picks.
    At the time, both were considered high for where they were picked. Even if Bird thought Hibbert was worth pick 11, he can take a calculated risk to get more assets due to other teams rating him relatively low. Rush might have been gone by pick 17. In the end, Bird managed to get Rush and Hibbert and a few other assets instead of just picking according to his own big board. Still, the consensus was that 13 for Rush and 17 for Hibbert were too high.

Similar Threads

  1. Building a better Pacers team
    By Pacersalltheway10 in forum Trade Proposals
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-30-2010, 09:03 PM
  2. building through youth? not true for the Pacers
    By Pacergeek in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 01-22-2010, 11:54 PM
  3. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-08-2007, 09:58 PM
  4. Are the Pacers building a team around JO or not?
    By Bball in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-29-2006, 09:54 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
  •