A GOOD way to judge the amount of fear and respect a team commands around the league is by listening to what its rivals have to say.

And considering what the Pacers had to say about the Knicks before last night’s game at Madison Square Garden, the answer is, not much.

“They’re a good team,” said Mark Jackson, former Knick turned former Knick-hater. “They’re a different team, but a good team. They just need time.”

Reggie Miller was asked if he would miss John Starks, his would-be nemesis who turned out to be more of a foil.

Miller snorted out a laugh, shrugged his narrow shoulders and disappeared into the trainer’s room.

You can take that as a no.

And as for Dale and Antonio Davis, they seemed positively giddy over the prospect of being able to clean the glass without the interference of the dear departed Charles Oakley.

Somehow, the specter of Marcus Camby does not strike the same kind of fear into the souls of visitors to the Garden.

“When I saw that trade, I didn’t understand it for the life of me,” Antonio Davis said. “Why they would do that? It’s really disturbing when you see someone giving it all they have and they just say, ‘He’s gone.'”

Crocodile tears, to be sure, but the demise of the Knicks-Pacers rivalry is at least cause for sadness.

Who, after all, would Miller take joy in humiliating last night?

Who would the “Davis Boys,” as Oakley used to respectfully refer to Dale and Antonio, trade elbows with under the boards?

Would Spike Lee even bother to show up?

OK, of course he would, but would the Knicks?

Truth is, the Pacers, who not so long ago were dog-eat-dog rivals with the Knicks, have long since zoomed past the local heroes to the point that they have nothing but nice things to say about them.

After all, when you are 20-9 and on top of your division, you don’t lower yourself to kick a dog in the street.

In fact, the respective positions of the Pacers and Knicks three-fifths of the way through this NBA seasonette prove what a lot of people had been saying all along about the secret to success following a lockout.

Those who made wholesale changes were headed for the closeout rack.

Those who stood pat would stand tall.

The Pacers, essentially the same team that won 68 games last year and came one game from dethroning the Bulls, are cruising along atop the Central Division. Their head coach, Larry Bird, could very well be working on back-to-back Coach of the Year Awards.

The Knicks, a team of strangers wearing New York laundry, are barely above .500 and in real danger of not making the playoffs for the first time in 12 years. Their coach, Jeff Van Gundy, will be lucky not only to survive the year, but the week, a scapegoat for the sins of his front office.

No wonder there was nothing but sympathy oozing out of the visitors locker room.

“Firing Jeff Van Gundy would be a big mistake,” said Jackson, the latest former Knick to offer a vote of confidence. “He’s one of the best basketball minds around. The team made a lot of changes, but he didn’t make those changes. I think he deserves better.”

Better than Camby and Latrell Sprewell for Starks and Oakley?

“I ain’t saying that, but losing Starks and Oakley was a tough thing,” Jackson said. “You’re talking about two guys who brought their hearts and souls to this organization.”

Even tougher than losing those two, however, is getting the new Knicks to play as a team. “It’s a short season and you have to adapt,” Jackson said. “Guys have to get to know each other, got to learn how the new guys play. You can see it in the standings. The teams that have been successful are the ones who haven’t made such drastic changes but just added to what they have.”

The Pacers certainly qualify.

Besides bringing back their nucleus – they added C-F Sam Perkins – they were one of the few teams that continued to behave as one during the lockout, rather than like a bunch of loosely-connected millionaires on an unexpected vacation.

Led by Miller and Jackson, the Pacers held regular workouts throughout the lockout. “On a good day, we probably had 12 guys in the gym,” Jackson said. “On a bad day, we probably had 8 or 9. We did it because we had a plan and a mission in sight.”

Their mission, of course, is an NBA title. The Knicks, on the other hand, are a team without a plan, without a core, without much of a chance.

Too many nights, they play like a bunch of guys who wandered into the gym for a pickup game. Even on their good nights, they bring little fire to the court.

A New York reporter in the visitors’ locker room mentioned that 20-9 is actually an underachievement for a team as talented and well-coached as the Pacers.

“You guys would take it,” Jackson said.

Sure, they would. But the Knicks would have to be a different team than the one they sent out on the court last night to face a team they used to have a rivalry with.

It was the same old Pacers at the Garden.

But it was the new Knicks.

New, but not improved.