Indiana Pacers are screwed

[action781]

Bold claim, yes.  Let's see if I can pull this argument off...

The Pacers have too much money wrapped up long term in Hibbert, West, Paul George, and George Hill.  They have a very good core in those 4 guys, but those 4 by themselves aren't enough to win a title.  In order to really contend, they NEED more good pieces around those 4 guys.

Here's the problem:  after this season, they will have $50mil committed to those 4 guys and another at least $15 committed to Scola, Mahinmi, Copeland, Watson, and Solomon Hill.  So they are over the cap.  This team as constituted cannot win a title.  They need at least 1 more very solid player, but no cap space to sign anyone except by using the mid-level exception.  Unfortunately, they are more than 1 MLE player away from contending as well. 

But the Pacers will have one other option to add talent around that team....  and that's to resign Lance Stephenson and/or Danny Granger with their bird rights.  This is Indiana's ONLY chance.  Doesn't sound so terrible, right?  OK, so they know what they have to do.  The problem is that these players' agents also will understand the situation at hand here.  Indiana has NO other choice; their hands are absolutely tied.  They either pay $60+ mil for a team (in a medium-small market) that will be a 2nd round bounce in the playoffs or they can sign these guys and actually have a chance.  They will have to pay them whatever the players demand.

So lets take a look at the team after next offseason - going into the 2014-15 season.  Then they will be a small-market team paying $80 mil for a very good team.  Some of their key players - West, Scola, Granger - are going to start showing some serious signs of their age.  If they win a title, great, but I don't think they'll have quite enough to win it all.

Then Scola, Copeland, and Watson all come off the books.  Because of whatever long term, big $ contracts were given out to Granger and/or Stephenson, Indiana will be over the cap still and have no choice but to resign (and overpay) them for whatever price they demand.  Or they can try to sign a MLE player for multiple years, which we all know how well that works out.


I envision this franchise turning into Memphis 2.0 without quite the bargain that Memphis got in Allen, Gasol and Conley.

[cons]

Agree those guys are good but still they need  free money to sign another big star guy to be true serious contenders.

[hpantazo]

Agree those guys are good but still they need  free money to sign another big star guy to be true serious contenders.

I don't think so. they were serious contenders last season and added Scola and are getting Granger back this year. If Granger fits in to the new group, they are a top 4 team for the next few years. If he doesn't, the key is getting the right return for him, which they should be able to do. They need to upgrade their pg position imo, and trading Granger for a better starting pg and brining Hill off the bench would make them very tough to beat.

[barefacedmonk]

If last year's ECFs were an indicator, I believe the Pacers did the right thing. You have to spend money to contend. You have to spend money to keep players like Hibbert and George on the team. They are very young and very productive players. If not the Pacers, some other team would have paid them the mega bucks.

Bench strength is a bit over-rated in the playoffs, imo. The Pacers; if healthy, are a young squad and can and will play the big minutes. Hill, George, Granger, West and Hibbert with Scola and Stephenson coming off the bench will be a very tough matchup for any opponent come play off time. Plus, CJ Watson should be much better than DJ Augustin was last year.

Off topic, but Hibbert has been working out with Tim Duncan this summer and has really bulked up. Should help his game a lot.

[hpantazo]

If last year's ECFs were an indicator, I believe the Pacers did the right thing. You have to spend money to contend. You have to spend money to keep players like Hibbert and George on the team. They are very young and very productive players. If not the Pacers, some other team would have paid them the mega bucks.

Bench strength is a bit over-rated in the playoffs, imo. The Pacers; if healthy, are a young squad and can and will play the big minutes. Hill, George, Granger, West and Hibbert with Scola and Stephenson coming off the bench will be a very tough matchup for any opponent come play off time. Plus, CJ Watson should be much better than DJ Augustin was last year.

Off topic, but Hibbert has been working out with Tim Duncan this summer and has really bulked up. Should help his game a lot.

Wow, Hibbert is huge! He should be quite a force this season. I agree that the Pacers did the right thing paying their young players. These guys have proven themselves and earned the contracts, these are the type of players you want to build around. Free money gets mid-market teams mediocre players, they should be ecstatic to use it on such quality young talent.

[PhoSita]

They've got George and Hibbert locked up for the long term.

That is enough to ensure they'll be winning 50 games a year as long as those guys stay healthy and the supporting cast isn't made out of paper clips and chewing gum.

They have until George and Hibbert hit their early to mid 30s to keep making playoff runs and hope that at some point they get the right mixture of luck and roster chemistry to give them a chance at a ring.

Honestly, they're probably in the best position a small market team like that could ever hope to be in.

They're much better off than the Grizzlies, for example.

[indeedproceed]

I don't think they're screwed at all, at least no more than they have been for the last 13 years, or rather since the brawl.

Here is where they were before:

Proud franchise, with a GM who refused to tank, in a relatively small media market with a fickle but passionate fanbase.

They never draft too high (highest pick made or immediately acquired by Indy is #10, George), and they have to have at least 2 or 3 quality deals on their roster at all times for the model to reach its peak, which we're probably looking at.

None of that has changed, and really they'll just keep on going like they always have. They'll trade away Hill, or Granger, and offer Stephenson a deal they think is fair (probably Tony Allen money) and go on from there. They can't fall back on spending their way out of tough choices like NY or BKN can, so yeah, they probably won't spend a extremely long time at the mountaintop, but they won't spend long at the base camp either.

You'll know the paradigm has shifted if they move Granger and Hill for Lowry and Gay or something.

[moiso]

They remind me of the championship Pistons team a little bit.  Very balanced with a lot of overall talent but no true superstar.  The Pistons got it done, so maybe the Pacers can.

[D.o.s.]

The lineup they've got now is probably going to be at their best this season. That's true.

On the other hand:

A lot of people like to talk about the Celtics being one game away from beating the Heat in the 11-12 playoffs, while glossing over the fact that Miami was missing Bosh--their third best player, and a top 10 big man in the league--for the majority of the series.

The Pacers were actually one game away from beating the Heat last year, and they've gotten significantly better in the 6, 7,8, and 9 rotation spots that see most of the real bench minutes in the playoffs.

To wit, they swapped out/augmented a playoff bench of Tyler Hansborough, Ian Mahimi, Sam Young, and Gerald Green for one with Danny Granger, Chris Copeland, and Luis Scola.

When the big problem with your team in the playoffs was the "close your eyes and hope they don't totally blow the game" bench, and you shore it up with some serious talent, I'm not sure 'screwed' is the best way to describe the situation.

[fairweatherfan]

Their window is pretty narrow, but worst case they can just flip some of their guys for younger talent and rebuild.  Lots of big-market teams will be happy to pay an aging David West (for instance) for a year or two of championship runs.

[Galeto]

They remind me of the championship Pistons team a little bit.  Very balanced with a lot of overall talent but no true superstar.  The Pistons got it done, so maybe the Pacers can.

I don't know, the Pistons model is tough to replicate.  One, their players were very underrated.  Billups has a reasonable case for the hall of fame and so does Ben Wallace compared to Dennis Rodman.  Rasheed was a great all-around defender and Hamilton was a pesky, effective scorer.  And then there was their playing style.  More than any team I can remember, they made you beat because they didn't beat themselves.  They were so good at the margins of efficiency.  Their defense was already tough enough but then they didn't turn the ball over, they hit threes and they could get to the line.  A team had to be mature and disciplined to beat them.

[More Banners]

They remind me of the championship Pistons team a little bit.  Very balanced with a lot of overall talent but no true superstar.  The Pistons got it done, so maybe the Pacers can.

I don't know, the Pistons model is tough to replicate.  One, their players were very underrated.  Billups has a reasonable case for the hall of fame and so does Ben Wallace compared to Dennis Rodman.  Rasheed was a great all-around defender and Hamilton was a pesky, effective scorer.  And then there was their playing style.  More than any team I can remember, they made you beat because they didn't beat themselves.  They were so good at the margins of efficiency.  Their defense was already tough enough but then they didn't turn the ball over, they hit threes and they could get to the line.  A team had to be mature and disciplined to beat them.

Right on point here.

the hard part about the Pistons team wasn't gathering the talent, but getting them to execute so well.  Shooters shot, defenders defended, etc.  Everyone played within themselves, and individually none were really all that special, aside from their efficiency which came from playing well together.

[Atzar]

Tons of pressure on Hill and Stephenson to be an adequate backcourt.  Hill is slightly underrated and very overpaid, and who knows what you're going to get from Stephenson.  I thought they needed a better backup guard than CJ Watson.  I do like the potential combo of Granger and Scola off the bench, though.  If Granger is healthy and will buy into a supersub role, that's a nightmare for nearly every 2nd unit in the league. 

They nearly beat the Heat last year, and they've improved.  If Granger is good to go, they've greatly improved.  If that's the case, I absolutely think they're contenders but I question how long their window is, especially if they let Granger walk after the upcoming season. 

[chambers]

I disagree on the first core statement. They've rolled the dice on Paul George becoming a top 10 player in the NBA which is a fair gamble. Hibbert's on track to be a top 3 center coming into his 5th year. They got incredibly lucky to get him with a later pick, even George blossoming at number 10 is as lucky as us getting Pierce at 10.
But they could have two top 10 players who are entering their primes, both signed to new deals.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

They have a reasonably young core, they went very far as was last season, really on th optimnistic end they are just a couple of savvy role players away from potential dynasty.