My goal would be to have homecourt advantage in the first round and win a playoff series (obviously the latter is more important). That would be very good progress for this team. Oh, I suppose I should add that they aren't embarrassed in the second round (if the second round was something like last year's first round against the Bulls I would be quite happy). In a way, I think the Hawks are an apt comparison. The Pacers look like a team that probably peaks at 50ish wins and second round playoff losses. However, they don't have a Joe Johnson-level contract and therefore have more cap space*. This is a subjective opinion, but they also seem a more likable team than the Hawks (the Hawks are a bad word for NBA fans, but I don't t hink that's only because of their ceiling). *As CCP said, in the NBA, they'll be held back by their market. A super star free agent is almost certainly never going to sign in Indianapolis. Because of that, the Pacers best bet is to build a deep quality team like they have now. That's the best a market like Indianapolis can hope for without lucking into being bad, winning the lottery, and having that year come in a very specific year when a superstar is available. Sounds like a very attainable goal. I agree that the Pacers are more likable than the Hawks. When comparing the 2, I think the Hawks have more top-end talent. I believe Horford, Smith, Johnson is better than any top 3 of the Pacers (Hibbert, George, Granger?) That said, the Pacers are much deeper, much younger, and aren't locked into bad contracts. I think your best bet to compete for a championship would be to have one of your young guys develop into a solid #2 option and then trade off some of the depth for a top player and have him fall in love with his teammates and the city. Obviously Eric Gordon would be a guy that comes to mind. I definitely am enjoying that the Pacers/Bulls rivalry is somewhat back, and should continue to grow in the coming years.