8p9s Roundtable: Did the 2000 Pacers Stand a Chance vs. Shaq and Kobe?

Did you think the Indiana Pacers could beat the Lakers in 2000?

Ben Gibson: Yes. While the Lakers had been a constant factor in the Western Conference playoffs, they hadn’t been able to punch through to the Finals until that year under Phil Jackson. Indiana’s first-place offense seemed like it could handle Shaq. Turns out, it couldn’t.

Tim Donahue: No. I think I accepted the Pacers as runners up while watching Portland throw away a 15-point fourth-quarter lead. The 67-win Lakers had been dominant, and Shaquille O’Neal was at the absolute peak of his career. Rik Smits’ feet were in the midst of ending his career, and while Austin Croshere had played well for the Pacers, Indiana could have really used another Davis to throw at Shaq. Even the Pacers seemed to view dying valiantly as an accomplishment, with Reggie Miller acknowledging that the Lakers were supposed to win. Maybe if Travis Best had gotten something better than an indecisive airball at the end of regulation of Game 4, then things could have gotten really interesting.

William Furr: I thought anything was possible. In 2000, I was 14-years-old and had been raised a Pacers fan from day 1. I knew the Lakers were nasty, and I kind of figured that Shaq was the best player in the league, but I thought the Dunkin’ Dutchman’s length would give him issues. I thought they had a legitimate chance.

Jon Washburn: Of course I did. I was also 13-years-old and my favorite movie was still Homeward Bound. The sense of optimism in young people is one of their most wonderful character traits. I actually remember loading up AOL and reading some shady piece on some website detailing five reasons why the Pacers would win. I excitedly told my dad and I remember him looking at me with that, “Sorry kid, you’re wrong, but I don’t want to crush your spirit” look on his face.

Next: Best Finals Moment