The NBA and NFL are fundamentally different leagues—let’s get that out of the way first.
Still, both the Indiana Pacers and Indianapolis Colts operate in the same market, with similar challenges in terms of market size and roster-building limitations. Yet, the contrast between the two organizations couldn’t be more striking. Despite the inherent difficulties of building in the NBA, it’s the Pacers—under Chad Buchanan and Kevin Pritchard—who’ve built a legitimate contender. Meanwhile, the Colts, under Chris Ballard’s near-decade-long tenure, continue to tread water. So how have the Pacers managed to build a winner, while the Colts remain stuck in neutral?
It starts at the top—with the engine of the team. The Pacers found theirs in Tyrese Haliburton. He’s transformed the franchise, helping lead Indiana to back-to-back conference finals and now the NBA Finals—just a few years removed from a full reset. While he hasn’t done it alone, Haliburton is undeniably the catalyst. The Colts, by contrast, are still searching for their engine. They hope Anthony Richardson can be that guy, and the potential is there. But he’s not Haliburton—not yet. There’s time, but the gap in development between the two is clear.
Beyond the star player, the Pacers have benefited from savvy roster construction. The NBA’s smaller roster size amplifies the impact of each move. Trades for Haliburton, Pascal Siakam, Aaron Nesmith, and Obi Toppin have paid off. Draft picks like Andrew Nembhard, Bennedict Mathurin, Ben Sheppard, and Jarace Walker have also contributed. Add in smart decisions to retain T.J. McConnell and Myles Turner, and you see a front office that’s made calculated, effective moves.
In contrast, while trades are less frequent in the NFL, they still matter. The Pacers have used that tool aggressively. Ballard? Not so much. His biggest asset should be free agency, but for years that tool has gone untouched. The refusal to make meaningful upgrades via free agency is a major reason the Colts haven’t taken the next step. Drafting is a gamble in both leagues—every team hits and misses. But in the NBA, trades and free agency are often the difference-makers. The Pacers have leaned into that reality. The Colts have resisted it.
Luck always plays a role, but organizations create their own luck through strategy, adaptability, and timing. The Pacers have been nimble and opportunistic. The Colts have been rigid and, at times, stagnant. One approach has led to results. The other, to frustration.
Roster building is an art form—especially in mid-market cities. It requires both a vision and a willingness to work within constraints creatively. The Pacers have consistently found ways to maximize their potential. The Colts, until recently, have not. This offseason, however, has hinted at a shift in Ballard’s approach. Maybe that will finally bring a change in fortune.
And if Ballard ever needs a blueprint, he doesn’t have to look far. Just across town, the Pacers are showing how it’s done.