Endless Loop wrote:nate33 wrote:badinage wrote:I like seeing Indiana’s success. Why?
Because they put the lie to the (too) popular idea that you have to have top-end lottery talent to be really good. That that’s the way to build.
Halliburton went 12, Siakam 27. They’ve got good ball-handlers and shooters galore. And a great coach. And they play a fun style — the ball moves, and the guys look like they’re having a great time.
Meh, their "success" was in beating a not-very-good Bucks team missing Giannis for the whole series and Dame for two games.
They are definitely a well-run front office who have made shrewd, proactive trades (Paul George for Sabonis and Oladipo, Sabonis for Haliburton, Brogdon for Nesmith, Bruce Brown and picks for Siakam), but by not bottoming out and drafting high, they probably won't be much better than a 4th seed during the Haliburton era. It's not like they're loaded with a bunch of talented 20-year-olds. Haliburton is still improving, and Mathurin has potential, but most of the rest of their good players are either vets (Turner, Siakam, McConnell) or 25-year-old guys who are WYSIWYG (Toppin, Nesmith, Nembhard).
Going forward, I like the prospects of Boston, Orlando, Philly and New York better. Cleveland too, if they retain Mitchell or find a way to trade him for equivalent value.
Just wondering, which roster would you prefer?
This Pacers roster, or the Heat roster from last year?
The Pacers roster, easily.
The Heat don't really have much talent outside of Bam and Jimmy. And Jimmy looks about done. Everyone else is a mediocre role player that probably wouldn't start on a .500 team. Spoelstra is a sorcerer.
