Indiana Pacers
2025-26Which supported roster decisions should be reviewed first, what later choices depend on them, and what remains unknowable?
IND has 13 actionable review nodes, but 4 nodes cannot be placed on a supported planning date.
The decision map
Planning anchors are staff workflow dates — grouped, never promoted to exact deadlines.Review a possible extension path for Ben Sheppard before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
Review a possible extension path for Jarace Walker before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
Review a possible extension path for Aaron Nesmith before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
Review a possible extension path for Johnny Furphy before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
Review a possible extension path for Pascal Siakam before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
Review a possible extension path for Jay Huff before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
The team controls the reported option decision for T.J. McConnell. The displayed date, if any, is not a contract-specific deadline.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Aaron Nesmith. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Ben Sheppard. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Jarace Walker. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review a possible extension path for Quenton Jackson before the visible contract horizon. Eligibility, terms, willingness and value are not certified.
What is and is not resolved
The team controls the reported option decision for T.J. McConnell. The displayed date, if any, is not a contract-specific deadline.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Jay Huff. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Johnny Furphy. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Pascal Siakam. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Quenton Jackson. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for Kam Jones. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible contract-control boundary for T.J. McConnell. June 30 is a planning proxy, not certified free agency.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible guarantee structure for Ben Sheppard. The exact decision date and downstream waiver, roster and cap effects are unavailable.
What is and is not resolved
Review the visible guarantee structure for Jay Huff. The exact decision date and downstream waiver, roster and cap effects are unavailable.
What is and is not resolved
The team controls the reported option decision for Johnny Furphy. The displayed date, if any, is not a contract-specific deadline.
What is and is not resolved
The team controls the reported option decision for Kam Jones. The displayed date, if any, is not a contract-specific deadline.
What is and is not resolved
Shared planning dates
Decisions that share a planning date — review pressure, not a claimed order.2 review nodes share this planning anchor for IND. They are grouped for staff workflow, not claimed as simultaneous contract deadlines.
One review node uses this planning anchor for IND. The anchor is not promoted to an exact contract deadline.
2 review nodes share this planning anchor for IND. They are grouped for staff workflow, not claimed as simultaneous contract deadlines.
One review node uses this planning anchor for IND. The anchor is not promoted to an exact contract deadline.
One review node uses this planning anchor for IND. The anchor is not promoted to an exact contract deadline.
reported option exposure $11.8M
3 review nodes share this planning anchor for IND. They are grouped for staff workflow, not claimed as simultaneous contract deadlines.
One review node uses this planning anchor for IND. The anchor is not promoted to an exact contract deadline.
One review node uses this planning anchor for IND. The anchor is not promoted to an exact contract deadline.
reported option exposure $5.00M
4 review nodes share this planning anchor for IND. They are grouped for staff workflow, not claimed as simultaneous contract deadlines.
2 review nodes share this planning anchor for IND. They are grouped for staff workflow, not claimed as simultaneous contract deadlines.
Connected decisions
Same player, same contract — one decision affects the other.The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
An earlier reported option season on the same contract must remain operative before the later option season can matter. Exact deadlines and legal mechanics remain unresolved.
The reported option controls whether the same player and contract continue into the visible horizon state. Exact contract timing and downstream rights remain unresolved.
The extension review belongs to the same player and contract as the later visible control horizon. Exact eligibility and legal effect remain unresolved.
The reported option controls whether the same player and contract continue into the visible horizon state. Exact contract timing and downstream rights remain unresolved.
The guarantee review belongs to the same player and contract as the visible control horizon. Its exact date and waiver or cap effect remain unresolved.
The guarantee review belongs to the same player and contract as the visible control horizon. Its exact date and waiver or cap effect remain unresolved.
The reported option controls whether the same player and contract continue into the visible horizon state. Exact contract timing and downstream rights remain unresolved.
The reported option controls whether the same player and contract continue into the visible horizon state. Exact contract timing and downstream rights remain unresolved.
Planning anchors are not automatically exact contract deadlines.
A CBA outside date is an upper bound; an individual contract may require an earlier choice.
Current cap context is not a recalculated future branch result.
Unknown cap holds, rights, exceptions, roster effects, market prices and legal mechanics remain unresolved.
Branches are conditional planning frames, not probabilities or recommendations.
Decision sequence, reported salary, current cap position, roster effect, CBA legality, market price, basketball evidence and outcome evidence remain separate. No blended score or automatic action is produced.