The Pacers rebuild... doing it the other way

[ahonui06]

Pacers look decent.

Now, they need to fire Jim O'Brien and replace him with Larry Bird.

And then the Pacers can replace Larry Bird with an experienced GM. This would allow the Pacers to be contenders in the East.

[stacey_is_king]

I'd say they get to .500 this year.

[thamadkant]

Im a Granger fan but he isnt first option...

Hibbert is nice... I like him too, potential to be Pacer's MAIN man if he continues to improve... I think he is a tweak away (energy wise and aggressiveness wise) from being a 20/10 player... the dude is 7 friggin 3.



So Pacers are..... Hibbert away from taking over as first option from being good.... or if they can get another player in Granger's level... because Granger is clearly an option 2 type.... if they can get that 2x Option 2 guy + Hibbert... they'd be good... and oh... a GOOD coach and system to utilize Hibbert.

[Sofia]

Instead they concentrated on CULTURE and getting the WHITE type of players,

fixed.

[daschysta]

Most of our players will be on the downside of their careers?!?! what are you smoking. Most of our core will be just entering their prime, while danny would be 30, and he has a game that is mostly reliant on the jumpshot, which won't go away with age... Plus paul george will be ready to take over by then

[Recently]

They will have alot of cap space after this season at least, and collison/hibbert is a nice core to build around (2 hardest positions to get)

[writerman]

Everyone shows OKC, Portland, Sacramento, Memphis, etc.'s style of rebuilding. Basically suck as much as possible, collect top 5 picks, then turn it around

How about some love for what the Pacers have done post melee. From the 07 season to now they've won 35, 36, 36, and 32 games and never gotten a pick higher than 10. They got labelled as the team with the worst position in the NBA for this reason, they were never bad enough to get great picks

Instead they concentrated on CULTURE and getting the right type of players, even if it means half the team is vets who 'hurt tanking'. People have called for Obie's head for years but this is his 4th season. The result is far more continuity and chemistry than franchises like Philly and Detroit who gun through coaches yearly. Bird understands its better for a rebuilding team to keep one coach because of continuity

They've patiently had faith in their 30-35 W and trying to win to the end strategy, contiously supported playing hard when other teams gave up and tanked. And they waited for the right moves. And now look at their team

Darren Collision (good starting young PG, could get better)
Brandon Rush (defensive 3pt shooter)
Danny Granger (all-star SF)
Psycho T (always room for someone who plays hard)
Roy Hibbert (future all-star, playing like a franchise C this season)

I would easily take this Pacers team going forward over Sacramento, Minnesota, Memphis, LA Clippers, etc with this core. Only OKC is above. And IMO the reason the Thunder are winning is the same reason Indy is on the way up. They focus on defense and winning players. This year they're 6-6 but have a 4+ SRS and 8-4 expected W-L so the stats say they've been better than that

Yes if every team tried to build like this it wouldn't be flawless. Some teams would stay mediocore. But there's just as many if not more teams who stay at the bottom in the 'tank for high picks' way. So I think Bird deserves some credit for being unorthadox and patient despite a handful of mediocore teams

People keep falling for this sort of early hype, the same way Warriors fans always bought late runs in losing seasons as a sign then team would be awesome the next year. The Pacers are looking ok, that's not a bad thing, they have some solid players, but they're never going to be a contender, and they're questionable to even make the playoffs. You don't win titles with "ok" play.

I never labelled them the "worst position in the NBA", that's for sure. But you can put me on record as saying Hibbert is not a franchise C, at least if you mean what I assume that term implies... he's certainly a starter for a winning team, but he's going to be very lucky to make more than 1 all-star game in his career, and that'll be a product of playing in the East.

I don't agree with your narrative either, comparing them to some random young teams, and then declaring that "only OKC" is more promising. The brawl happened in 2004-5, and since then the Jazz have gone from a 26 win team to a perennial 50+ win team (despite injuries), the Blazers have gone from a 27 win team to a perennial 50+win team (who has been hit by absurd and unprecedented injuries over the last few years), The Hornets have gone from an 18 win team to a perennial contender (minus last years injury ruined season), the Hawks went from 13 wins to a borderline contender, the Cavs went from missing the playoffs to a contender, the Magic went from missing the playoffs to being a contender, etc. And since then we've seen the rise of OKC (as you point out). All of this is alot more impressive than anything the Pacers have done.

You say you'll take the Pacers over the Wolves/Clippers/Kings/Memphis. The only reason I agree with the Clippers is because of their ownership, it has nothing to do with young cores (I'll take the Clippers core that has a chance to eventually win something). Memphis has a better core, but play in the West... if these guys were in the East, I'd take them in a heartbeat. The Kings have a long way to go, they've also been hurt, but long term they've got a better chance than the Pacers too if healthy. As for the Wolves, management is a serious problem, but I'll take their young cast too, since at least it has a hope in hell of winning a title (especially if they get Rubio over).

Most of the Pacers guys will start to be on the downside of their careers in 3 years, and what will they have achieved by then? Nothing of significance. They're at best a 1st round playoff team this year, and without a real star and some real depth that's not going to change. Most of their guys are nothing special at all. For the Pacers to get good, they need their GM to pull off a series of miracle home runs, like the Webber/Richmond trade, or the Gasol/rubbish trade. Lottery teams don't need to rely on miracles to be successful (miracles we have no reason to believe Pacers management is capable of), and as such I prefer their method.

OH my..sides hurt from laughing...such drivel does have comedic value...

[AdamTheGreek]

Pacers should get a bottom playoff seed. But they can't afford any more injuries or they'll finish yet again with around 35 wins.

[cjs55]

Instead they concentrated on CULTURE and getting the WHITE type of players,

fixed.

Seriously, that Collison guy is just pasty.

[writerman]

The Pacers have very good young players at the one (Collison) and the five (Hibbert)--as people here have noted, the two hardest positions to fill--plus an all-star (Granger, 28) at the three. At the two, they have a young guy (Rush) who has a ton of talent who plays very good defense, has legit three-point range, and who finally shows signs of living up to the expectations the Pacers had when they drafted him (see his last two games.) They also have a project in Lance Stephenson who has the potential to be something special at the position and can also play the one on occasion. Also at the one they have a young guy in A. J. Price who shows signs of being an excellent second-string PG or possibly more. What was a weakness the last few years--PG--is now a strength with excellent depth. At the four they have two young guys (McRoberts, an athletic freak) and Hansborough, (a Jeff Foster type guy with more talent) that have shown they can platoon the position, defend and board well, and contribute some scoring. Right now between the two the Pacers are getting 12 and 10 from the position. Waiting in the wings they have Paul George who they have the luxury of developing slowly. He can play the two or the three, and has been compared by some to young Tracy McGrady and Danny Granger.

That's a very impressive young core and naysayers are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.

They need a solid back-up five and another year or two of experience and they could well be one of the elite teams in the league.

Even better, they are going to have a ton of cap space this offseason to play with.

The building process has been slow and deliberate, but the future of this team looks very bright for the next decade.

[Tommy Sneakers]

I have always hated the Portland/OKC way of rebuilding. It really sucks being a fan of a terrible team whose only goal is to collect draft picks. Not to mention that it is usually not very effective. It is certainly not the "right way" to rebuild like many say.

I guess you can say this was a great way to rebuild for OKC since Seattle did all the tanking for them.

[Nate505]

It's tough to rebuild without high draft picks. Even the Jazz who are masters at getting pieces that fit their system needed a high draft pick to get one of their cornerstones, although they did manage to find two HOFers in the mid teens range years ago.

[Nom De Guerre]

Instead they concentrated on CULTURE and getting the WHITE type of players,

fixed.

Are you implying white players aren't talented?

[darth_federer]

Wait, didnt Lance Stephenson push his pregnant girlfriend down the stairs? I thought he was waived.

[Hoopalotta]

Personally, I like the Pacers position and you have to give credit for what's been achieved with the mid round picks there.

But the main thing is that there's some good young players on the roster AND they have a load of cap space opening up. That convergence ups the ceiling quite a bit, but it's a rather nice feel-good story they've got going and their best players are real professionals.

Count me as a big fan of the Hibbenought as well - he's nipping at the heels of the better centers in the league and could indeed become a first option with more polish on his post game. A real throwback guy who can set the table for your halfcourt offense.

But the real question is, what is going to be achieved with the cap space? Best case and worst case there is a pretty big fork in the roads as far as future prospects.

[Draft Master J]

They'll probably get the 7th or 8th seed with around 41 wins. But is that really a position you want to celebrate being in as a team?

As opposed to still scraping the bottom of the NBA barrel hoping your next top-five draft pick is the one who finally turns things around? It's called gradual progression and it's what nearly all teams go through on their way back up. 40-something wins and a low playoff seed one year. Build on that and aim for 50 wins and a mid-to-high playoff seed the next*. Hopefully by year three you've developed enough to be a legit challenger.

Anyways, Indy is now 7-6 despite playing a tough schedule. That's fine by me. Hibbert and Collison should only get better, and the team should improve with them. Another important point: We've got level-headed, mature guys who can and should develop good chemistry. We're not headcase central like some of these other young teams. We also have the pieces to fill in the holes, either via trade(s) or with our 2010 capspace. The goal is to build a 2000's Detroit-like team; no big superstars, but talented, intelligent, hard-nosed players at every position. I think we're well on our way to doing that.

Probably 90% of Pacer fans were down on Larry Bird and David Morway, calling for their heads. They've proven us wrong. They deserve respect for doing things the righteous way.



*That is unless you're the Milwaukee Bucks, in which case you expose yourselves as one-year wonders by immediately going back to being an NBA doormat.

[jowglenn]

Instead they concentrated on CULTURE and getting the WHITE type of players,

fixed.

Hahahaha.

We have 4 white players on our roster. Our starting PG, SF, C are black, and Rush will soon be our starting SG. We traded a white guy for 2 black guys over the summer. We drafted black guys.

We are **** sick of all the white jokes. They're not funny, nor are they original. **** off.

Most of the Pacers guys will start to be on the downside of their careers in 3 years,

Guy that said that, you have no idea what you're talking about. Really? They'll be on the downside of their careers? When Granger is 30, and Hibbert, Rush, Collison, Hansbrough, George are all still 27 or under? You lose all credibility with a statement like that.

[boogydown]

Its harder to win the way the Pacers did it, but it can be done. It takes very good planning and you need to draft good.

Pacers though aren't that good of a drafting team.

[D-Rock]

Hey now, Sacramento foundered in declining mediocrity for 4-5 years with their "rebuild on the fly" strategy. Look how far that got them? Finally they blew it all up by getting rid of their aging, over-paid, under-achieving vets and that got them Tyreke Evans. Tyreke at the 4th spot was the worst possible pick they could have got, BTW.

[jowglenn]

Its harder to win the way the Pacers did it, but it can be done. It takes very good planning and you need to draft good.

Pacers though aren't that good of a drafting team.

I will give you that to some degree. We drafted Shawne Williams a few years ago (when we could have had RONDO) and Hansbrough, I feel, was a bad choice when we could have taken collison, holiday, lawson. Turns out to be not so bad, really, since we got collison in the end anyway.

But taking mid-round picks and getting Granger and Hibbert out of them is not really bad drafting. Some people above are like, "Aw, pacers got lucky in the draft, man."

Well, why didn't any of the teams picking before them get lucky? Oh, that's right, they were picking guys like Yaroslav Korolev and Sean May. I mean, look at some of the guys taken before Granger, it's hilarious. That was really a pretty bad draft. So maybe it was luck that we got Granger, but it's also because at least 10 teams made bad picks before us. So we're at least a better-drafting team than those 10 teams, right?