Is the massive amount of cap space the Pacers have worthless

[LoveDaBoo]

Bill Simmons predicts Arron Afflalo will sign in Indiana to the tune of 4 years and $50 million. Would hate to lose him on the Nuggets, but no way would he be worth $12.5 million per season.

Bill Simmons is largely clueless about non big market teams. He's a funny guy, but i've never seen him write a single decent anything about indy. 12.5 million for afflalo? What's he smoking?
'

Well, where are they going to spend their money? Because, by rule, they have to spend a ton.

[Pacerlive]

LoveDaboo,

The Pacers have to spend 12 million or so and that can easily be done given that they still need a backup center and another pf. GIve Landry 5 mill or so and chase after Crawford or Jefferson. FIll out the rest of the roster with scrubs on one year deals.

I would much rather give money to Dwest or Nene but even if they take conservative approach it can be done.

[GodDamnRobin]

GodDamnRobin, you are seriously one of the most ridiculous Pacers haters I've ever seen. One of the most ridiculous haters, period.

Yeah, the Pacers PR machine... Uh, every team has those. Everyone posts news about their favorite team, any good news that comes out during the offseason. I'm pretty sure Demar Derozan did some amazing thing, and Eliot Williams has a 48 inch vertical, and so on and so forth.

They sure do, but the Pacers seem better at this than other front offices, because the fans fall for it all the time.

But your complete historical ignorance is astounding. Yes, usually cap space is used to take on overpaid players. You're right. But often times you get some compensation in return. Also, they're usually overpaid for 2 or 3 years, not 4 or 5 like if you sign them as a FA.

Here are some examples (these are literally the ones off the top of my head) that show what a fool you are:

1. OKC trades cap space for Matt Harpring and Eric Maynor. So yeah, they pay Harpring but got a young guy on a rookie contract.

You're going to build your team around Maynor? Nobody is saying you can't get a talent upgrade by eating some bad contracts, the point being made (very clearly I think) is you can't use it to get the sort of upgrade you guys need.

2. OKC trades cap space for Mo Pete and moving up like 10 spots in the draft. They moved up like 10 spots, which isn't nothing.

Same point, it's not like they moved from 11 to 1, this is all marginal stuff, and in a weak draft to boot. Note also, OKC was able to do this sort of thing because they were a losing team with a low payroll, whereas Indy is trying to win and, if they get their way and spend on someone like Nene, they will not have enough space to be pulling off all these trades for long. I'd be thrilled if the Pacers tried to blow it up like this, it doesn't seem to be the direction they're moving for though.

3. Jazz got Al Jefferson for 2 picks and cap space - cap space is way more attractive than an expiring contract. Yes, Jefferson is maybe overpaid, but the cap space allowed them to get him there when there would not have been much of any chance to get him as a FA.

... how has Al Jefferson worked out for them? Notice the 2 picks. You guys can't give them picks if you're trying to win and rebuild at the same time, and that's the exact problem with Indy. Let's say you traded your next 2 picks and cap space for Jefferson circa 2010. Would that solve your problems? No. That's the point, you can't solve your core problems this way.

4. Heat gave Beasley to the Wolves for cap space (so they could sign Lebron/Bosh).

You can't sign Lebron and Bosh. This is what we call an outlier. You're not it.

5. Bullls traded Hinrich and the 17th pick to Washington for... cap space.

Hinrich did Washington little good and was soon moved, the Bulls needed the space to acquire the much more talented Boozer. That's the thing I keep explaining, these are all marginal upgrades, the sort that won't help your team change the fundamental realities of your make uo. And you don't have the cap space to do all these deals, just 1 or 2.

So, to recap: You have no f***ing clue what you're talking about, you're an anti-Pacers troll (which is super-weird... i mean... the pacers? who HATES the pacers?) and your references on other threads to players like David Harrison (who you referred to as Dwight Harrison) and Jonathan Bender show just how woefully stuck in the past you are.

Re-cap, you didn't read anything I said.

You couldn't even come up with any recent examples of how the pacers "PR Machine" hypes up players. David Harrison was never nearly as hyped up as you seem to think, anyway. He was a 30th pick in the draft, was 7' and huge, and at the time we thought, "hey he could end up being a contributor."

Big concession there. Dude, I gave you plenty of examples of hyped up players on your team. Bender, F.Jones, B.Rush, I.Diogu, Harrison, S.Williams, the guys you have on your team right now.

Bender actually WAS A GOOD PLAYER. Not that you would know that, given your utterly pathetic knowledge of basketball, particularly as it pertains to the Pacers. The guy was a great contributor for us; health issues derailed his whole career while he was just coming into his own.

Bender sucked long before any injury problems, he was a DNP machine while in perfect health. But thanks for being honest with how you felt about him.

[Pacerlive]

Do you realize that over half the fans booed the Brandon Rush pick or the Tyler Hansbrough pick at Conseco

Your done here...

[gumbercules]

Big concession there. Dude, I gave you plenty of examples of hyped up players on your team. Bender, F.Jones, B.Rush, I.Diogu, Harrison, S.Williams

.

Seriously, who the hell ever hyped these people any more than any other player gets hyped?

Please find some actually proof besides a random poster here and there.

...or just give it up.

[GodDamnRobin]

I don't think you want me trawling realgm for stuff Pacer fans said... it'll get embarassing.

[Pacersike]

If you want to spend your time like that, u should definitely do that

[Lakers05]

No, it's not worthless. The key is not to spend it on mediocre players and just take the penalty, because you'll still have capspace next season. This goes for every small market teams.

[Lakers05]

I notice 2 threads on the front page of this board by the Pacer PR machine, hyping their players: "George grew taller during the summer", and "Lance Trimmed Fat and Bulked Up". It works every time it seems.

To the guy who said they can use cap space for trades... unless you're using that cap space to sign a guy who would otherwise have gone to your team as a FA, generally cap space for trades means you're acquiring a player who is perceived to be overpaid (otherwise the other team wouldn't be moving him to your team), and there's a long and glorious history of this. This isn't a way for the Pacers to make the necessary improvement in talent, in fact given how far away the Pacers are, it's essentially proposing the equivalent of acquiring a Lebron type talent by offering cap space as a sweetener. Absurd.

It's not PR. Lance Stephenson does have game and seems to be in good shape:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya7TVofk ... r_embedded

The Pacers have a bright future. I think if their young talent blossomed as projected, they have an outside chance of landing Dwight and/or Paul.

[Indy2thaWindy]

I don't think you want me trawling realgm for stuff Pacer fans said... it'll get embarassing.

You're so sorry. You act like you're not a Kings fan but yet in the who's the 2nd best run franchise over the last 15 years thread you posted

I voted for the Kings btw. I think recent failures aside, they come out in front overall because of the awesome work they did in the initial 10 year period, where the front office revived a dead franchise with no assets, and turned it into the most popular team in the NBA in short order. Their front office started to falter in the mid-00's, and began a slow tail off, but I'm going to give it to them over the Jazz.

Their overal record over the last 15 seasons is 593-605. Only a Kings homer would think that.

You're definitely singlepurposeac. Why would a Kings fan get off by talking about the Pacers?

Yo, let's not bring up Tyreke Wade, Demarcus Duncan, Jimmer Nash, or Omri Bird.

I hope they don't waive you again. I always get a good laugh when I read your posts.

[GodDamnRobin]

I'm not a Kings fan, I just call it how I see it, and they were the 2nd best managed over that period I think. I gave arguments too.

[BH8]

I'm not a Kings fan, I just call it how I see it, and they were the 2nd best managed over that period I think. I gave arguments too.

I would say that drafting Tyreke Evans and giving Udrih that contract negates anything good they have done over the past 20 years.

[GodDamnRobin]

Go to that thread, and make that argument. Pacers have had a slightly above average FO in that time period btw. I'm just not a fan of people being unobjective.

[Indy2thaWindy]

Go to that thread, and make that argument. Pacers have had a slightly above average FO in that time period btw. I'm just not a fan of people being unobjective.

Over that time period

Pacers 639 - 559

Kings 593 - 605

Yet Pacers only had a slightly above average front office while the Kings were the 2nd best managed team?

[GodDamnRobin]

1) Not a Kings fan
2) You measure success based on both context and achievement. Not every team started with the same assets in 1997. What makes the Kings GM'ing impressive is they started with literally nothing, and no hope, and turned it into a juggernaut, with an almost flawless process. Things started to gradually slip in the GM'ing post 2004, but I'm alot more impressed by a guy who starts off with $5 and turns it into $50,000 than I am by the guy who turns $25K into $50K.

[Indy2thaWindy]

That "juggernaut" made it to the WCF's once.

[GodDamnRobin]

They did have some injuries though. If they'd played the some of the Eastern Conferences the Pacers did, they'd obviously have done better.

Anyway, after you accused me of being some old poster, I went and googled "Pacers" "realgm" and the posters name. This is the first thread to come up. It's a pretty compelling account of all the reasons I'm right.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1069493&start=90
There is some astounding homerism in it, including Roy Hibbert being described as better than Bogut already, an all-star/all-NBA type player.

I liked this post particularly:

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.

How are those Pacers looking? Better than the Grizzlies yet? How about compared to the Clippers in the future? Will Hibbert be making the all-NBA 3rd team this year writerman?

Another thread, about whether Tyler H is an all-star, features the following post:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1100934&p=27305090

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.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1069493&start=30

George could be the next Grant Hill. He has a lot of tools in his toolbox, as Special K likes to say. Grant was versatile and capable of playing 4 positions in his prime. George also has deceiving handles, vision, strength and accelerates like a rabbit.

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1100593

Other examples, about Tyler H:

I honestly see him as a poor man's chris bosh. He's already stronger than him and probably a better rebounder, even. I'd watch him -- he could become an all star in a couple years.

Or this thread, where one fan writes:
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1100593&p=27279095

Tyler Hansbrough will be a great player/all-star in the NBA one day. Last year he had the ear infection and this year Jim O'Brien was letting him rot on the bench. Thank God Vogel is the interim coach for now.

If this is anything to go by, I underestimated the Pacer's PR machines success... they deserve a raise. Thanks for point it my way

[Indy2thaWindy]

Posts from you, umm uhh, I mean singlepurposeac.

I definitely recall one particularly odd Pacer fan saying Dwight Howard was nothing on David Harrison

Did he claim David Harrison was better than Dwight? (hint; what I actually said)

A poster referring to you, umm uhh, I mean singlepurposeac.

You have 156 posts in 3 days? That's insane!

That's all from one page from one of the threads you linked.

Do you honestly think you can fool people? You're not very smart are you? You're just incriminating yourself.

[WhatsaTDot]

I don't care what you say or how true it might be

[Indy2thaWindy]

Oh, and this gem.

Aminu could be the next Derrick Mckey. Phil Jackson called Mckey a poor man's Scottie Pippen, in regards to his superior defensive capabilities (made possible by having the arms of a 7 footer).

George could be the next Grant Hill. He has a lot of tools in his toolbox, as Special K likes to say. Grant was versatile and capable of playing 4 positions in his prime. George also has deceiving handles, vision, strength and accelerates like a rabbit.

I'd take either one any day of the week, but for the Pacers Paul George was a gift. He is surprisingly good at rebounding the ball at its peak, just because he can usually get higher faster.

I am sure waiting on a phenomenal defender to develop isn't as much fun, but the end result will be worth the wait.

First George gets compared to T-Mac, then called the next Grant Hill! I don't know what it is with Pacer fans, maybe they're just easy to sell, but the seem to constantly be on the wrong end of crow eating with regards to player prediction. Magic Bender, Dwight Harrison, Wilt Hibbert, all-star Al, all-star Hansborough, Reggie Rush, Scott "better than Brad Miller" Pollard. Everywhere I go, it's the same. I won't even repeat some of the things said about their PG... you'd think with so many terrible predictions a fanbase would become more circumspect...

BUSTED!