Indiana
What Should Indiana Pacers Do With Open Roster Spot?
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA – JANUARY 10: Quenton Jackson #29 of the Indiana Pacers drives to the basket against the Miami Heat at Gainbridge Fieldhouse on January 10, 2026 in Indianapolis, Indiana. (Photo by Justin Casterline/Getty Images)
Getty Images
BROOKLYN – With the trade deadline having passed, the Indiana Pacers don’t have a full roster. The team has three two-way contract players, but only 14 guys on standard contracts, just under the maximum of 15.
As of this writing, the Pacers total team spending this season is about $730k less than the NBA’s luxury tax threshold for the 2025-26 season. That means the team has enough wiggle room under that spending line to add a 15th player without becoming a taxpaying team. Given the team’s poor record, the luxury tax line should be an upper spending limit for the franchise this league year, but Indiana can now fill its roster without crossing that barrier.
More specifically, the team can fill their open roster spot at any point between now and the end of the season with a deal that starts under $730k, either via a minimum-salary deal or by dipping into their Mid-Level Salary Exception. And they should add someone – having a full roster and using every available resource is smart business.
“We’ve got to be mindful of the tax as we go through things, but there’s a timing and sequence that gives us the possibility to do something there,” Pacers general manager Chad Buchanan said of the Pacers open spot on the roster.
What considerations do the Pacers have for their open roster spot?
But there are other considerations for the Pacers, particularly on the calendar, when it comes to making transactions. And those considerations will all come to a head in the next week as the team figures out the back of its roster.
March 1 is the first date of significance. That is the last day for what is colloquially known as the buyout market. Often, between the trade deadline and March 1, teams and players determine that their contractual obligation to each other doesn’t make much sense for the rest of the season.
In order to make splitting up a win-win move, the team and player will agree to a buyout, meaning the team will waive a player in exchange for getting some guaranteed salary removed from their contract. Almost always, the player makes up the amount given up in the buyout by signing with another team. So the player doesn’t lose money and their old team can proceed with a roster spot, of which they can use for something they deem more appropriate.
March 1 is viewed as the end of the buyout market because it is the last day a player can be waived, then later sign with another team and still be eligible for the playoffs. If a player is released after that date, they lose postseason eligibility.
For the Pacers, it may be worth seeing if a player that they want becomes available between now and March 1. Jeremy Sochan, for example, was waived by the San Antonio Spurs before signing with the New York Knicks earlier this month. While Indiana may not have wanted Sochan, he is a young and skilled player. More talent of note may hit free agency in the coming week.
The second date the Pacers will be cognizant of is March 4. That’s the final day that NBA teams can sign players to two-way contracts this season, which adds an additional wrinkle to the Pacers plans.
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA – OCTOBER 13: Jalen Slawson #18 of the Indiana Pacers drives to the basket against the San Antonio Spurs during the preseason game at Bankers Life Fieldhouse on October 13, 2025 in Indianapolis, Indiana. (Photo by Justin Casterline/Getty Images)
Getty Images
While the Pacers don’t currently have an open two-way contract slot, they could if they opted to promote one of their current players on a two-way deal to a standard contract. And one candidate stands out for that type of transaction for multiple reasons: Quenton Jackson.
Contractual factors play a part in Jackson being by far the most likely Pacers two-way player to have his deal converted to a standard contract. Jackson is currently on a one-year deal, meaning he will be a free agent in the offseason. That is not true of Indiana’s other two-way contract players – both Ethan Thompson and Taelon Peter are signed to two-year, two-way contracts.
Jackson has reached four years of service in the NBA, meaning he isn’t eligible for a two-way deal next season. If the Pacers want to keep him beyond the current campaign, they’d need to sign him to a standard contract anyway.
And that brings the team to the main reason they may want to convert Jackson to a standard contract and retain him beyond this season: he’s a talented player. Ever since stepping into a bigger role in late 2024, the athletic guard has proven that he can contribute and give the blue and gold rotation-level minutes in a pinch. He is averaging 9.1 points and 2.1 assists per game this season – both numbers are career-best marks.
He has played in 60 games for the Pacers across the last three seasons, all of which have come on different two-way deals. In 27 outings for the Pacers G League affiliate team, Jackson has averaged 22.1 points and 5.7 assists per game.
Converting Jackson to a standard deal, and perhaps a multi-year one, would fill the Pacers final open roster spot and free up a two-way contract slot. It could also allow the team to keep Jackson as a depth piece beyond this season. Jackson is skilled and athletic, and he fits Indiana’s style well.
“[Jackson is] definitely a real possibility. Quenton’s been awesome. He was fantastic last night, and he’s a big part of our culture in our locker room,” Buchanan said of Jackson perhaps getting the team’s final roster spot.
If that is the route the Pacers decide to take, they would then be able to sign a player to a two-way contract. That sequence of transactions is how they landed Jackson in the first place back in 2024. There are endless candidates for a two-way deal, but if the Pacers look to add a wing after losing Johnny Furphy to injury, Jalen Slawson may be a good fit. He is in the Pacers program via their G League affiliate and played for Indiana during the 2025 preseason.
Because the Pacers can’t sign a two-way contract player after March 4, if they decide to convert Jackson they would almost certainly do so before that date so they can backfill his two-way spot. Between that and the buyout market, the Pacers could fill out their roster within the next week or so. A young player or a familiar face makes too much sense.
Gov. Mike Braun asked state regulators to reconsider their decision to greenlight a $71 million rate increase for AES Indiana, doubling down on his condemnation of a move that could leave Indianapolis residents with higher electrical bills for years.
Braun wrote in a June 18 news release that he had asked Indiana Utility Counselor Abby Gray, who heads the office representing ratepayers in proceedings before the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, to petition for a rehearing of the AES rate case.
Gray indicated in the release that her office would submit the petition shortly. No petition had been posted on the IURC’s online docket as of this story’s publication.
The rate increase, which was approved by the IURC on June 17, was substantially less than the $192 million increase that AES initially requested. It was also less than the amount proposed in a settlement last October between AES and major electricity consumers.
But the Office of Utility Consumer Counselor, which Gray leads, came out strongly against any increase to AES’s base rates. In September, the OUCC called for a $21 million reduction instead.
As the Republican Party grapples with rising discontent over affordability, Braun has used opposition to rising utility rates to telegraph that he’s committed to keeping costs down for Indiana residents. He signed a law in February that allows the state to make rate-setting decisions that reward or penalize utilities based on metrics including affordability.
In March, he told reporters that he would take on Indiana’s five investor-owned utilities, describing himself as the “new sheriff in town.”
And after the IURC voted 3-1 to approve the AES rate increase, he wrote in a post to X that he was “deeply disappointed.”
Braun wrote in the June 18 news release that he had appointed Gray, a longtime OUCC lawyer and judge, to her current post because he knew she “would help me fight for Hoosiers.”
According to AES’s estimates, the rate increase will cost households an additional $5 per month for every 1,000 kilowatt hours of electricity they use, beginning in July. A second hike will take effect in January.
Tilly Robinson is a Pulliam fellow for the Indianapolis Star. She can be reached at tilly.robinson@indystar.com.
The Protect College Sports Act, legislation meant to introduce and codify sweeping reforms related to college athletics, passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday morning.
It now heads to the Senate floor.
The bill passed out of committee by a 19-9 vote. Indiana Republican Sen. Todd Young voted no, his decision reflecting Big Ten concerns over the bill.
A spokesman for Sen. Young told IndyStar, “Senator Young hopes that additional changes can be made to the bill to address concerns raised by the Big Ten.”
Co-sponsored by Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Washington), the Protect College Sports Act represents Congress’ most substantial success so far in a yearslong effort to bring legislative reform to college athletics. Since before the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders in college sports — including the NCAA, member conferences and schools, and other major players — have lobbied for national solutions to what have become state and regional problems.
Several pieces of legislation have been introduced across the last several years, only to fizzle long before reaching the floor of either chamber. The SCORE Act, introduced last year in the House of Representatives, gained some traction and passed out of committee, but was never brought to the floor.
Which makes Thursday’s news meaningful. Moving the Protect College Sports Act to the Senate floor, while not a guarantee of any outcome, potentially takes the bill past a threshold no other such piece of reformative legislation has yet been able to cross.
Cruz told Yahoo! Sports’ Ross Dellenger on Thursday that Cruz believes Sen. Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is committed to introducing the bill to the Senate floor soon.
The bill provides a legal framework for a host of potential reforms and protections for college sports. It grants limited antitrust protection to the NCAA, places limits on certain things including potential conference realignment, builds safeguards meant to protect non-revenue and Olympic sports, addresses potential broadcast rights reforms, and more.
It enjoys significant backing, and not just among leaders in college sports. This week, the NFL, its players’ association, the National Basketball Players Association and Major League Baseball all voiced their support for the bill.
Two key constituencies not in lockstep on the bill voiced their own concerns Thursday.
In a joint statement issued just after 10 a.m. Thursday, the Big Ten and SEC — far and away the two most powerful conferences and arguably two greatest power centers, full stop, in college athletics — suggested they still hold significant reservations over the bill.
“From the outset, we identified a set of essential revisions to the PCSA necessary for the long-term sustainability of college athletics,” the statement read. “We have worked with both majority and minority staff to advance those revisions, which focus on better supporting student-athletes and stabilizing the college sports environment. We continue to believe revisions are needed to secure our support for the bill.
“Despite our sustained engagement and good faith efforts, these critical revisions have not been accepted.”
The statement went on to note the “several Commerce Committee members that share our concerns and support these recommendations.”
Young is one of several members of the committee representing a Big Ten state, including one of three Republicans. He is the only Republican member of the committee whose state contains multiple schools in the conference.
Allowing for those reservations, Thursday’s news is still significant. It marks the first time a bipartisan bill on the subject has reached this point in the Senate and, should it be brought to the floor, it would be the first such legislation to reach that stage, in either chamber.
The bill could be brought to the Senate floor as early as July, though that timeline remains fluid.
(INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE) – The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission voted 3-1 Wednesday to approve a $71 million electricity rate increase for AES Indiana customers.
That is about 37% of what the utility initially requested and lower than a settlement agreement proposed in October.
Neither Gov. Mike Braun nor consumer advocates are happy with the outcome.
“My top priority is affordability, which is why I am deeply disappointed by the IURC’s approval of another AES rate increase,” he said. “Hoosiers have spent years tightening their belts and making tough financial decisions. It’s time for utility companies to do the same.”
Members of the commission didn’t explain their votes Wednesday. IURC Chair Andy Zay focused his remarks on the process.
“There’s a lot of eyes on this order and what we’re doing today,” he said. “What is before you on the floor is a nearly a year’s worth of work, evidence, deliberations, and considerations that bring us to this moment in this decision. None of this was taken lightly. I want to thank my colleagues for the patience and working through this amongst the auspice of affordability, which is certainly a hot topic now, as well as the resiliency, reliability that we see in this increased demand in electricity.”
The Office of Utility Consumer Counselor last year recommended that state regulators deny AES Indiana’s request for a $193 million base rate increase — instead proposing a $21 million reduction in current rates.
“The AES rate order issued today is an outrage and Hoosiers deserve better!” Counselor Abby Gray said in a statement Wednesday. “Governor Braun has made it clear that ratepayer affordability is a priority, far more than just a ‘hot topic’ as described by the chairman of the IURC today. This order fails the governor’s call to overhaul how utilities are regulated in order to lower bills for ratepayers.”
Gray’s office represents Hoosier ratepayers in regulatory cases.
“The order approves a substantial profit margin for shareholders in addition to a rate increase for customers,” she continued. “It even requires ratepayers to pay approximately $3 million to AES lawyers and experts.”
AES Indiana provides electricity service to about 490,000 homes and businesses in Indianapolis and some nearby areas.
The utility originally sought $193 million in rate increases. The previously proposed settlement agreement dropped that to $91 million, while the final, approved settlement agreement lands at $71 million.
Three IURC members supported the increase: Zay, David Veleta and David Ziegner.
Commissioner Bob Deig voted no. A fifth member, Anthony Swinger, recused himself because he worked on the case previously when he was on the consumer counselor’s office staff.
Ben Inskeep, program director for ratepayer advocacy group Citizens Action Coalition, said utilities across the country often ask for a larger increase than they need, knowing that regulators will disallow “roughly half” of it.
“The latest AES Indiana fuel adjustment clause proceeding shows AES Indiana is actually not only earning all of their allowed profit but over-earning by $19 million their return amount,” he said. “They’re already extremely financially successful at this moment in time, so it’s rather bizarre to even get an extra $71 million dollars approved here.”
Inskeep also noted that the increases will fall disproportionately on residential customers over commercial and industrial users.
Brandi Davis-Handy, president of AES Indiana, said the company has maintained some of the lowest rates in the state for more than a decade “through disciplined planning and a focus on efficiency. We applied the same approach here by working closely with stakeholders to make balanced decisions that keep the system reliable, limit customer impact, and align with the state’s energy pillars.”
AES said for a typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours per month, the increase will be less than $5 per month per phase. Phase one rates will be implemented in July 2026 and phase two rates will be implemented in January 2027.
The final order says the utility “will not seek to implement a change in basic rates and charges as a result of its next base rate case before January 1, 2030.”
A new law, however, requires all utilities to file a multi-year rate case in 2029, though implementation wouldn’t happen until 2030.
-
Alabama2 minutes agoKids take center stage at Alabama Shakespeare Festival summer camp
-
Alaska7 minutes agoAlaska Airlines names CFO as new president
-
Arizona14 minutes agoWife turns in Arizona startup CEO husband over fraud allegations
-
Arkansas17 minutes agoArkansas men’s track and field celebrates banner season with updated flag | Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
-
California22 minutes agoCalifornia lawmakers seek $32M to combat invasive pest found on grapevines sold at Costco
-
Colorado29 minutes agoColorado’s Deion Sanders With Controversial Big 12 Coach Ranking
-
Connecticut32 minutes agoSierra Club Connecticut, State Representatives Host Black Lungs Matter: Juneteenth Press Event – CleanTechnica
-
Delaware37 minutes agoFrom blueprint to breakthrough: Tackling affordable housing in Wilmington
