PDA

View Full Version : Star} SI jinx? No, this cover just stinks for Pacers



Will Galen
10-20-2005, 04:29 AM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051020/COLUMNISTS01/510200488/1088/SPORTS04

IndyStar.com Columnists Bob Kravitz

October 20, 2005


Bob Kravitz
SI jinx? No, this cover just stinks for Pacers

Look at the happy couple, will you? Right there on the cover of Indianapolis Illustrated, formerly Sports Illustrated, it's the great martyr, Ron Artest, and standing behind him, humming Tammy Wynette's "Stand By Your Man,'' it's Mr. No Nonsense, Larry Bird.
Two questions:

When was the wedding, and what happened to my invitation?

What we are seeing here is the greatest marriage of convenience since Bill and Hillary Clinton. Artest needs Bird because Bird's word is gospel around here, and with Bird's blessing, he is golden. And Bird needs Artest, because while he knows he truly can't trust him, he realizes he can't get value in a trade.

So there they go, arm in arm, traipsing off together into the sunset, a happy couple whose reputations and destinies are tied to one another.
What? Do I sound cynical?

I guess that's because even before last season, even before things got out of hand, Bird privately told people he couldn't trust Artest and could never win an NBA title with Artest. Despite his public denials to the contrary, he was, in fact, hoping to deal Artest to the Sacramento Kings for Peja Stojakovic.

So, what changed between the start of last season and now?
Well, there was Rick Carlisle's decision to suspend Artest when he wanted to jump ship on a team already ravaged by injuries. There was the whole brawl thing. There was the post-brawl interview on national TV, where he pushed his CD and generally made no sense. And more recently, before the first preseason game, he talked about being a "caged animal,'' then played so irresponsibly against New Jersey, he instantly drew a public rebuke from Carlisle.

So . . . what? Bird trusts him now? Or is he, too, the victim of convenient amnesia, an affliction that has spread throughout the city?

Mr. No Nonsense has put up with 10 times more nonsense than Isiah Thomas ever did. But because Bird is Bird, and because Thomas never produced an NBA finalist, Bird's judgment is trusted implicitly, and Thomas is viewed as a world-class enabler.

The SI cover, which I'm sure is being warmly received by both the NBA and Jermaine O'Neal, rates as the height of the nonsense.

I'm not taking issue with SI's decision to go with Artest, even if it's for all the wrong reasons.

Instead, I'm taking issue with the Pacers for agreeing to pose for that cover. I'm taking issue with the Pacers' failure to step in and tell Artest he's in the business now of making things right with his team, not soaking in the dubious glory that comes with appearances on the covers of SI and, yikes, Penthouse. (At least I can finally say I'm buying it for the articles.) I'm especially taking issue with Bird's decision to, quite literally, stand behind Artest for that shot.

What is Bird saying to Artest's teammates, who stood up for and stood in for Artest during and after The Brawl? If you're one of the Pacers who played so gallantly in a short-handed situation last season, how do you feel when your boss is treating Artest like he's returning as some kind of conquering hero?
If I'm O'Neal, I'm remembering how Bird publicly took me to task at season's end, and wondering if acting badly is the way to earn the organization's undying love.

Look, if the Pacers feel like they have no real choice but to stand behind Artest, that's fine. But let's not make a grandstand play out of this dysfunctional relationship.

And if he messes up again, I don't want to hear any complaints from anybody in Pacers management, specifically Bird. If he goes south, Bird flies south with him. Together. Just like on the cover.

What's worse is, we're being peddled a story line that features Artest as a martyr, Artest as the poor, misunderstood victim of oppressive commissioner David Stern. It's not just inaccurate, it's appalling.

If fans want to buy it, OK; fans aren't supposed to be rational. My problem is how the Pacers have become complicit with those who would push that notion. My problem is with the national magazine types who parachute in for a week or two and claim special insight into the enigma that is Artest.
We haven't seen revisionist history like this since the Russians were air-brushing Stalin out of official state photographs.

Yeah, Artest is a good-hearted guy. He likes children. He's nice to old people. He gives to charity. And so do about a dozen other guys in the Pacers' locker room.

It was funny, a few weeks back, when Artest's harshest local critic -- OK, only local critic -- showed up at a preseason practice.
"Bob,'' he said. "You still don't want me here?''

"As long as you're here,'' I told him, "I always have something to write about.''
It gives me no pleasure to say that I've always been right about Artest. I hate to see talent wasted. I think he's a good person. I hope, for once, he proves me wrong.

In the meantime, I'm hearing the swimsuit issue will feature Artest and Bird in matching thongs, merrily sharing a pina colada from a coconut shell. Can't wait.

Will Galen
10-20-2005, 04:45 AM
I'll take Mark Montieth (the bunny) any day before this venom peddler.

Peck
10-20-2005, 05:06 AM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051020/COLUMNISTS01/510200488/1088/SPORTS04

IndyStar.com Columnists Bob Kravitz

October 20, 2005


Bob Kravitz
SI jinx? No, this cover just stinks for Pacers

Look at the happy couple, will you? Right there on the cover of Indianapolis Illustrated, formerly Sports Illustrated, it's the great martyr, Ron Artest, and standing behind him, humming Tammy Wynette's "Stand By Your Man,'' it's Mr. No Nonsense, Larry Bird.
Two questions:

When was the wedding, and what happened to my invitation?

What we are seeing here is the greatest marriage of convenience since Bill and Hillary Clinton. Artest needs Bird because Bird's word is gospel around here, and with Bird's blessing, he is golden. And Bird needs Artest, because while he knows he truly can't trust him, he realizes he can't get value in a trade.

So there they go, arm in arm, traipsing off together into the sunset, a happy couple whose reputations and destinies are tied to one another.
What? Do I sound cynical?

I guess that's because even before last season, even before things got out of hand, Bird privately told people he couldn't trust Artest and could never win an NBA title with Artest. Despite his public denials to the contrary, he was, in fact, hoping to deal Artest to the Sacramento Kings for Peja Stojakovic.

So, what changed between the start of last season and now?
Well, there was Rick Carlisle's decision to suspend Artest when he wanted to jump ship on a team already ravaged by injuries. There was the whole brawl thing. There was the post-brawl interview on national TV, where he pushed his CD and generally made no sense. And more recently, before the first preseason game, he talked about being a "caged animal,'' then played so irresponsibly against New Jersey, he instantly drew a public rebuke from Carlisle.

So . . . what? Bird trusts him now? Or is he, too, the victim of convenient amnesia, an affliction that has spread throughout the city?

Mr. No Nonsense has put up with 10 times more nonsense than Isiah Thomas ever did. But because Bird is Bird, and because Thomas never produced an NBA finalist, Bird's judgment is trusted implicitly, and Thomas is viewed as a world-class enabler.

The SI cover, which I'm sure is being warmly received by both the NBA and Jermaine O'Neal, rates as the height of the nonsense.

I'm not taking issue with SI's decision to go with Artest, even if it's for all the wrong reasons.

Instead, I'm taking issue with the Pacers for agreeing to pose for that cover. I'm taking issue with the Pacers' failure to step in and tell Artest he's in the business now of making things right with his team, not soaking in the dubious glory that comes with appearances on the covers of SI and, yikes, Penthouse. (At least I can finally say I'm buying it for the articles.) I'm especially taking issue with Bird's decision to, quite literally, stand behind Artest for that shot.

What is Bird saying to Artest's teammates, who stood up for and stood in for Artest during and after The Brawl? If you're one of the Pacers who played so gallantly in a short-handed situation last season, how do you feel when your boss is treating Artest like he's returning as some kind of conquering hero?
If I'm O'Neal, I'm remembering how Bird publicly took me to task at season's end, and wondering if acting badly is the way to earn the organization's undying love.

Look, if the Pacers feel like they have no real choice but to stand behind Artest, that's fine. But let's not make a grandstand play out of this dysfunctional relationship.

And if he messes up again, I don't want to hear any complaints from anybody in Pacers management, specifically Bird. If he goes south, Bird flies south with him. Together. Just like on the cover.

What's worse is, we're being peddled a story line that features Artest as a martyr, Artest as the poor, misunderstood victim of oppressive commissioner David Stern. It's not just inaccurate, it's appalling.

If fans want to buy it, OK; fans aren't supposed to be rational. My problem is how the Pacers have become complicit with those who would push that notion. My problem is with the national magazine types who parachute in for a week or two and claim special insight into the enigma that is Artest.
We haven't seen revisionist history like this since the Russians were air-brushing Stalin out of official state photographs.

Yeah, Artest is a good-hearted guy. He likes children. He's nice to old people. He gives to charity. And so do about a dozen other guys in the Pacers' locker room.

It was funny, a few weeks back, when Artest's harshest local critic -- OK, only local critic -- showed up at a preseason practice.
"Bob,'' he said. "You still don't want me here?''

"As long as you're here,'' I told him, "I always have something to write about.''
It gives me no pleasure to say that I've always been right about Artest. I hate to see talent wasted. I think he's a good person. I hope, for once, he proves me wrong.

In the meantime, I'm hearing the swimsuit issue will feature Artest and Bird in matching thongs, merrily sharing a pina colada from a coconut shell. Can't wait.


There is no in-between about that statement that I highlighted & what I'm about to say.

There are only two options here.

1. Bob Kravitz is a liar.

2. Larry Bird actually said that.

Neither is a good option.

I know many of you (hell in fact I'll say 75% of you) will just say that Kravitz is lying. Well if he is, he is doing it with the express consent of his editors, publisher & every lawyer who works for Gannet.

You don't make that kind of bold statement without an editor looking over it & most likely considering who he is making that statement against (Bird) my guess is that it went beyond a sports page editor.

I'm not saying he's not lying, I am saying that if he is the entire newspaper has to be in on it as well because you know d@mn well that will send storys flying all across the wires.

Now let's look at the other side of this.

What if Bird actually said this. What does that say about our team? If this is the way Bird truely feels & now is stuck with Ron because he can't get fair trade in return then weigh this sentance in your head for a long time.

He does not trust him to win a title. Is he the only won on the team who feels this way?

This article is pure dynamite. Probably will be the single biggest controversial article he has ever written.

Many of you, most of you will hate it. Many people will spend hours talking about it & at the end of the day Kravitz will just smile.

Cause remember, he may or may not believe what he is typing. It's just his job to get you to talk about his article so that they can sell newspapers.

One story has to be the truth & I can think of no other options to present.

My guess, & remember I am a card carrying member of the Anti-Artest bandwagon so I won't even try & hide it, it's a true statement.

But I won't discount that Kravitz made it up to sell a story. But if he did, there will be hell to pay if he is caught.

Destined4Greatness
10-20-2005, 05:12 AM
Do you have to ***** and moan about everything and use every possible oppurtunity to bash artest.

<I>guess that's because even before last season, even before things got out of hand, Bird privately told people he couldn't trust Artest and could never win an NBA title with Artest. Despite his public denials to the contrary, he was, in fact, hoping to deal Artest to the Sacramento Kings for Peja Stojakovic.</I>

Mind Telling us some of these people. I mean that might help your case, your credibiltiy around Pacer nation isn't all that great. And do you have any supporting facts other than that same old tired rumor.

Look we got it, you don't like Artest. You write the same article every couple of weeks. Try writing something, hmm Good about the Pacers. Or even nuetral. But frankly it seems you hate Artest more than the Guy he punched at the brawl.

BTW Matt Leinart decided to go for the TD, You get payed to get it right. You think you could do that.

^^^^^^^Thats what I wrote to Kravitz. Seriously I am tired of him. He seems to be anti-every Indiana team. He is not even close to be nuetral. Neutral or a fanboy is acceptable, but not a hater.

Will Galen
10-20-2005, 05:30 AM
Peck, I caught that too. I thought of a third option though. Obviously the venom peddler didn't hear Bird say this himself or we would have read it before now. That made me think of a third option, that someone might have set the venom peddler up.

I agree with Peck though. I think Bird actually said this, but when he couldn't get anything he wanted for Ron he decided he would make people regret not dealing with him. Bird would like nothing better than to tell other GM's, "Well you could have had him if you would have given me a fair deal."

I don't see it as a big problem though. People say all kinds of things all the time when they are upset. So Bird said it, so what? No problem unless he still believes the Pacers can't win a title with Ron. I think it's obvious he's changed his mind.

Now for my thoughts on the Venom Peddler. Well no, I'll just ask this question.
Who would you rather have reporting on the Pacers, Mark Montieth, who kept some things quiet, or the sanctimonious venom peddler who doesn't care if what he prints causes the Pacers trouble?

I remember now why I quit reading the Venom Peddler. Nothing he ever says makes me feel good. Instead I always feel dirty as if I've been drug though filth. I'll try not to let it happen again!

Peck
10-20-2005, 05:53 AM
Peck, I caught that too. I thought of a third option though. Obviously the venom peddler didn't hear Bird say this himself or we would have read it before now. That made me think of a third option, that someone might have set the venom peddler up.

I agree with Peck though. I think Bird actually said this, but when he couldn't get anything he wanted for Ron he decided he would make people regret not dealing with him. Bird would like nothing better than to tell other GM's, "Well you could have had him if you would have given me a fair deal."

I don't see it as a big problem though. People say all kinds of things all the time when they are upset. So Bird said it, so what? No problem unless he still believes the Pacers can't win a title with Ron. I think it's obvious he's changed his mind.

Now for my thoughts on the Venom Peddler. Well no, I'll just ask this question.
Who would you rather have reporting on the Pacers, Mark Montieth, who kept some things quiet, or the sanctimonious venom peddler who doesn't care if what he prints causes the Pacers trouble?

I remember now why I quit reading the Venom Peddler. Nothing he ever says makes me feel good. Instead I always feel dirty as if I've been drug though filth. I'll try not to let it happen again!

If your asking me, I will tell you it totally depends on what kind of report I'm getting.

If I just want a game summery then I'll take the bunny.

But if I want in-depth reporting on the team? Sorry, I'll take the venom peddler every day.

If I just wanted something that always made the Pacers sound like they did the absolute right thing no matter what then I'd just read Pacers.com.

Of course, I like a little more controversy than you do so I'll grant you that 95% of the people on here would probably rather have Montieth.

Now to your third option idea. Not a bad thought, although I will say this. He still would have had to run it past his editors & I know Journalistic standards have dropped over the years & I know that people don't think much of the star. But do you really beleive that they would have published this without at least knowing who heard this?

able
10-20-2005, 06:05 AM
as it is a "column" and not a fact finding article, hearsay is more then enough "proof" as it is "an opinion" (the column).

It can therefore be utter crap, as he is entitled to an opinion.

Please do not think that BK has any "knowledge" on the team that he now shares with us, it is perhaps something he heard and otherwise something he made up to give credence to his opinion, facts do and did not come into the piece at any moment.

And Peck, before you "pick" BK to "inform you" please be aware that a columnist does not have to "check" his story and that the chances he will get "real" inside information on the team as opposed to Montieth getting it are about 1000 to 1

In fact I am sure they will do everythingthey can to misinform him or ignore him.

Kaufman
10-20-2005, 10:49 AM
Able brings up some good points.

Bob Kravitz is not an Indianapolis guy. In the 5 or so years that he has been with us, I don't feel that that is long enough to make "contacts". And furthermore, I don't think Bob brings the credibility necessary to quickly make them, either. He came into Indianapolis, and I don't think he made friends quick and fast. So how would he easily get a scoop on a story? Sure it's possible he gets some bones thrown his way every now and then, but I frankly don't think he has a good pulse on the Indianapolis community in large. My two cents...

Unclebuck
10-20-2005, 11:36 AM
There is no in-between about that statement that I highlighted & what I'm about to say.

There are only two options here.

1. Bob Kravitz is a liar.

2. Larry Bird actually said that.

Neither is a good option.

I know many of you (hell in fact I'll say 75% of you) will just say that Kravitz is lying. Well if he is, he is doing it with the express consent of his editors, publisher & every lawyer who works for Gannet.

You don't make that kind of bold statement without an editor looking over it & most likely considering who he is making that statement against (Bird) my guess is that it went beyond a sports page editor.

I'm not saying he's not lying, I am saying that if he is the entire newspaper has to be in on it as well because you know d@mn well that will send storys flying all across the wires.

Now let's look at the other side of this.

What if Bird actually said this. What does that say about our team? If this is the way Bird truely feels & now is stuck with Ron because he can't get fair trade in return then weigh this sentance in your head for a long time.

He does not trust him to win a title. Is he the only won on the team who feels this way?

This article is pure dynamite. Probably will be the single biggest controversial article he has ever written.

Many of you, most of you will hate it. Many people will spend hours talking about it & at the end of the day Kravitz will just smile.

Cause remember, he may or may not believe what he is typing. It's just his job to get you to talk about his article so that they can sell newspapers.

One story has to be the truth & I can think of no other options to present.

My guess, & remember I am a card carrying member of the Anti-Artest bandwagon so I won't even try & hide it, it's a true statement.

But I won't discount that Kravitz made it up to sell a story. But if he did, there will be hell to pay if he is caught.

Oh I don't think Kravitz is lying. I believe Bird said it then and he very well might believe it now. I suppose it is possible that Bird has changed his opinion in the past 13 months, but that is unlikely.

Bird might very well feel the same way about J.O.

Bird seems like the type who is a show me type of guy, and Ron needs to show him before he truly believes in Ronnie.

Peck, how is that for "spin" Sounds pretty good to me

I say it is up to Ronnie to prove Bird wrong and many others.

Peck, I don't think this "new revelation" means that Bird does not like Ron or his game

RWB
10-20-2005, 11:49 AM
I'm telling you Bob Kravitz is a joke. Why????? Look I'm stuck dealing with Colts camp everyday they are in Terre Haute. I know which reporters show up each and everyday and I get a kick out of his stories about what's going on with the Colts during that time. Why????? Because from July 27 to August 19 I saw the man only once. You would think for someone to form an opionion they might want to show up where the action is taking place. The man is worse than the grocery store tabloids. IMHO he's lying.....

Harmonica
10-20-2005, 11:56 AM
First, TPTB were trying their damnedest to move Ron last summer. As I've stated before, I think they miscalculated in trying to get equal value for him. Well, c'mon guys, you don't try to trade a player of Ron's caliber unless he's a detriment to the team. There seems to be an ongoing naivity about this around here. So yes, Larry may very well have made that statement. Probably did. So what? Why would that surprise anyone?

Secondly, Kravitz simply doesn't get it. I imagine Donnie and Larry read this article and thought, "No sh&#238;t, dumbass. But if we're ever going to make a decent trade for Ron, by all outward appearances we have to make everything seem hunky-dory here in Pacersland. It's called PR. Thanks for trying to make it that much more difficult for us, idiot."

Like I told UB in another thread regarding the SI article, don't believe everything you read. Kravitz, of all people, should know that.

Anyway, I wouldn't get my hackles up one way or another about this article.

Pacers#1Fan
10-20-2005, 12:08 PM
Kravitz gets on my nerves.

Destined4Greatness
10-20-2005, 12:17 PM
OK Indystar, just send me an e-mail saying

<I>Bob Kravitz forwarded your letter to me. If you would like us to consider it for publication, we need your name and city of residence. Thanks.
Jim Lefko
Sports editor </I>

Alabama-Redneck
10-20-2005, 01:06 PM
I guess that's because even before last season, even before things got out of hand, Bird privately told people he couldn't trust Artest and could never win an NBA title with Artest. Despite his public denials to the contrary, he was, in fact, hoping to deal Artest to the Sacramento Kings for Peja Stojakovic.


My only question is since this obviously was taken out of context, what was the rest of the statement made at that time. Could there have been additional information such as; "He could not trust Artest and could never win an NBA title with Artest, unless Ron got help."

Now, that changes the whole meaning from what D!ckhead wrote.

Just curious !!

:cool:

Slick Pinkham
10-20-2005, 01:07 PM
I agree with Peck though. I think Bird actually said this, but when he couldn't get anything he wanted for Ron he decided he would make people regret not dealing with him.



This seems to be fit exactly with Bird's legendary personality. He is a very opinionated guy who is also persistent, stubborn, and tenacious.

As a player he was a notorious tightwad. He saved his meal money. He was the LAST guy to pick up a check. He got his finances in order and was set for life with his rookie contract, while others partied.

I think that the same level of frugality extends to his role now. He may have decided that he has to get rid of Ron Artest, but he has also decided what Ron is worth and refuses to settle for even one little bit less. He is hoping for one clean season (or maybe a half-season) so that Ron's market value meets up with what Bird thinks that it is.

I don't like Kravitz as a writer, but I believe the quote attributed to Bird, though it undoubtedly came to him second-hand or third-hand.

RWB
10-20-2005, 01:19 PM
I don't like Kravitz as a writer, but I believe the quote attributed to Bird, though it undoubtedly came to him second-hand or third-hand.

Or possibly the way Bob Kravitz works this quote could have come from this forum. And no I'm not joking.

Bball
10-20-2005, 01:45 PM
Is there something new in that Kravitz piece for anyone that has been paying attention here at PD?

-Bball

grace
10-20-2005, 01:54 PM
It can therefore be utter crap, as he is entitled to an opinion.


Kravitz's opinion is utter crap. I swear the guy loves to be hated. A couple years ago I e-mailed him about something (I don't remember what) and my letter got published too.

Bird's a liar. Kravitz is a liar. I don't know if either is true or not. Actually I don't care. This is just another illustration that no one should EVER give an interview to SI. Nothing good ever comes of it.





(I'm sure you all noticed I said "Kravitz" instead of :kravitz:. Why? you might ask. Well, it's not because of the controversy of too many smilies. No. It's the fact that Purdue plays Wisconsin this weekend and the last thing I want to do is tick off Badger fans.)

beast23
10-20-2005, 02:00 PM
Kravitz dropped the bomb. But let’s revisit some of the events before and after the brawl.

It is a fact that the Pacers attempted to trade Artest the summer before the brawl.

But is it possible that the King’s, knowing they had the upper hand in the negotiations, decided to go for the sky and wanted Jermaine as well? Possible something like Peja, Miller and throw-ins for Artest and Jermaine? Is it possible the Pacers then laughed and said, what the hell, we guess we are stuck with Artest.

It is a fact that brawl happened and that our lineup was decimated.

Is it possible that the Pacers received hundreds of complaining phone calls, maybe even from the mayor’s and governor’s offices, and as a result that Larry and Donnie would have traded Artest for a bucket of horse*****, if only they could? Is it possible that Larry and Donnie were (privately) actually quite pleased that Artest was suspended for the entire year?

It is a fact that Reggie made it known that he would retire.

Is it possible that Reggie’s pending retirement, along with Artest’s private statements of remorse, and also considering his diligence in seeking/acquiring medication and counseling, combined with public backing, possibly changed the opinions of Larry and Donnie in regards to Artest’s future with the team.

Is it possible that Larry and Donnie, who both are extremely fond of Reggie, and recognizing that the Pacers only shot for a title in Reggie’s last season might require Artest’s talents, changed their opinions on Artest to the point where they actually petitioned Stern for Artest’s reinstatement?

Like ‘Buck, I’ve appreciated Artest’s presence on the court for the Pacers. Even with that said, I would have to back Kravitz’s statement. I’ve heard the same thing from a couple of acquaintances I have that are close to the Pacers. I believe the word of choice was “livid” in describing the feelings of Walsh, Bird and the Simons.

HOWEVER, it is possible to change one’s mind. And I’m not just talking about changing what spews from one’s mouth because of convenience or a business need; I’m talking about an honest to god change of one’s mindset, what one honestly believes internally, whether it is uttered to the world or not.

Could it be possible that Larry (and Donnie) have experienced a change in their opinions? Could it be possible that if they have undergone such a change, that Kravitz would have no way of knowing it because he is no longer in the “inner circle” of confidants, due to his continued negatively slanted columns regarding a few of the team’s key personnel?

Not that I would know anything. I just happen to have an inquiring mind.

Ultimate Frisbee
10-20-2005, 02:09 PM
Kravitz = hater

Destined4Greatness
10-20-2005, 02:13 PM
Kravitz dropped the bomb. But let’s revisit some of the events before and after the brawl.

<B>It is a fact that the Pacers attempted to trade Artest the summer before the brawl.</B>

But is it possible that the King’s, knowing they had the upper hand in the negotiations, decided to go for the sky and wanted Jermaine as well? Possible something like Peja, Miller and throw-ins for Artest and Jermaine? Is it possible the Pacers then laughed and said, what the hell, we guess we are stuck with Artest.

It is a fact that brawl happened and that our lineup was decimated.

Is it possible that the Pacers received hundreds of complaining phone calls, maybe even from the mayor’s and governor’s offices, and as a result that Larry and Donnie would have traded Artest for a bucket of horse*****, if only they could? Is it possible that Larry and Donnie were (privately) actually quite pleased that Artest was suspended for the entire year?

It is a fact that Reggie made it known that he would retire.

Is it possible that Reggie’s pending retirement, along with Artest’s private statements of remorse, and also considering his diligence in seeking/acquiring medication and counseling, combined with public backing, possibly changed the opinions of Larry and Donnie in regards to Artest’s future with the team.

Is it possible that Larry and Donnie, who both are extremely fond of Reggie, and recognizing that the Pacers only shot for a title in Reggie’s last season might require Artest’s talents, changed their opinions on Artest to the point where they actually petitioned Stern for Artest’s reinstatement?

Like ‘Buck, I’ve appreciated Artest’s presence on the court for the Pacers. Even with that said, I would have to back Kravitz’s statement. I’ve heard the same thing from a couple of acquaintances I have that are close to the Pacers. I believe the word of choice was “livid” in describing the feelings of Walsh, Bird and the Simons.

HOWEVER, it is possible to change one’s mind. And I’m not just talking about changing what spews from one’s mouth because of convenience or a business need; I’m talking about an honest to god change of one’s mindset, what one honestly believes internally, whether it is uttered to the world or not.

Could it be possible that Larry (and Donnie) have experienced a change in their opinions? Could it be possible that if they have undergone such a change, that Kravitz would have no way of knowing it because he is no longer in the “inner circle” of confidants, due to his continued negatively slanted columns regarding a few of the team’s key personnel?

Not that I would know anything. I just happen to have an inquiring mind.

No that isn't a fact. Its a rumor.

beast23
10-20-2005, 02:17 PM
Actually... no. It is a fact.

Harmonica
10-20-2005, 02:19 PM
No that isn't a fact. Its a rumor.

It's a fact. But the Kings didn't ask for Jermaine. It was a straight up Ron for Peja proposition. And Ron was included in the package for McGrady. Both are facts.

Hicks
10-20-2005, 02:20 PM
No that isn't a fact. Its a rumor.

Only if you don't know certain people. Sorry to go "secret society" on you, but if my word means anything to you, I can assure you they tried.

RWB
10-20-2005, 02:26 PM
Could it be possible that if they have undergone such a change, that Kravitz would have no way of knowing it because he is no longer in the “inner circle” of confidants, due to his continued negatively slanted columns regarding a few of the team’s key personnel?


Very interesting point. Could Kravitz have a vendetta against the PAcers now. Last year when he showed up on FSN being interviewed by Paetz those very few times I just had this feeling Bobbie was trying to broaden his appeal. I still think he doesn't care one iota about Indy or Indiana. Bob's running out of time to become Pete Vescey, Sam Smith, or God awful Woody Page.

Destined4Greatness
10-20-2005, 02:36 PM
Forgot about T-Mac. But being involved in a trade for a better player is very different than being involved in one where your team gets screwed.

Fool
10-20-2005, 02:42 PM
And some people watch the Days of Our Lives.

NorCal_Pacerfan
10-20-2005, 02:49 PM
That article is utter garbage. I couldn't even finish it. It was about 10 paragraphs too long. You get his feelings for the SI Cover and Artest right from the start. He then goes on to tell you in 10 different ways. A complete waste of time. Idiot.

Destined4Greatness
10-20-2005, 03:02 PM
I just am saying I don't believe we offered Artest for Peja officially. But its perfectly understandable we offered him for T-Mac

Peck
10-20-2005, 03:22 PM
I just am saying I don't believe we offered Artest for Peja officially. But its perfectly understandable we offered him for T-Mac

Your either going to beleive this or you won't so I'll just put it out there for you.

Artest was being traded for Peja. Now read what I said there, he WAS being traded. It was all but a done deal & the younger Maaloof brother (co-owner of the Kings) backed out of the deal. He & Peja reportedly had a heart to heart & he decided that he could work out the problems they were having with him over the Divac deal & this is when the Webber deal started to go together.

Some of this info. can be found on the Sac. Bee websight (if they still have it archived) & unfortunately some of it is through back door knowledge. Like Hicks I am sorry about playing the "I know but I can't tell you how I know" game. Trust me, if I were you I'd tell me to stick it up my @ss as well. But unfortunately I have to do the same thing.

ChicagoJ
10-20-2005, 03:37 PM
Sometime, when Artest is no longer in the picture, and DW and Bird talk as candidly about Ron as Jerry Krause has... maybe some of you will finally get a clue.

No, check that, you'll just label DW and Bird as "Haters." :rolleyes:

The problem with trying to trade Ron is that too many GMs around the league *do* know the real story - whatever it is. The NBA fraternity is dysfunctional and in-bred. I'm sure Brad Miller, for example, shared enough "Did I tell you about the time Ron..." stories to the Sacramento team that they knew what was up. Some happy PR from the Pacers won't go very far; Ron's going to have prove a negative - that he won't ever break a team's trust again, to have any trade value.

Unclebuck
10-20-2005, 03:44 PM
Jay, Peck and to everyone I know very well what Artest is and the troubles he causes, but I am so glad the Kings backed out of the Peja for Artest deal. Peja might just be the most overrated player in the NBA right now.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again, I know the full story about Artest, and I still want him here.

The only trade of Artest I was in favor of was the T-Mac trade.

Arcadian
10-20-2005, 03:47 PM
This article displayed every reason I dislike Kravitz as a writer. It had nothing to do with basketball. The bombshell people are talking about is just hearsay that results in to he said/she said gossip. Furthermore, the fact that Kravitz needs a Ron to write about considering the team that we do have only shows me he has no interest in basketball.

However all of that said the opinions he share I cannot disagree with. Chiefly, the Pacers are rewarding bad behavior.

ChicagoJ
10-20-2005, 03:53 PM
Jay, Peck and to everyone I know very well what Artest is and the troubles he causes, but I am so glad the Kings backed out of the Peja for Artest deal. Peja might just be the most overrated player in the NBA right now.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again, I know the full story about Artest, and I still want him here.

The only trade of Artest I was in favor of was the T-Mac trade.


Bingo. You enjoy watching Ron play defense more than you would enjoy a team championship.

:flirt:

PS, I liked the Peja deal solely because I believed it was too good to be true. Just considering on-the-court stuff, obviously Peja is nowhere near the player Ron is. But factoring everything else, because it really does matter, well there's a reason they broke off the trade, not us.

Destined4Greatness
10-20-2005, 03:55 PM
One Article that states that the Trade Rumor was more than Larry Inquiring by a credible source. Just one. Until then all it is is your opinion. And at least mine is backed up.

ChicagoJ
10-20-2005, 04:01 PM
One Article that states that the Trade Rumor was more than Larry Inquiring by a credible source. Just one. Until then all it is is your opinion. And at least mine is backed up.

I'm confused. Which opinion is backed up? And how exactly is it backed up?

Unclebuck
10-20-2005, 04:29 PM
Bingo. You enjoy watching Ron play defense more than you would enjoy a team championship.

:flirt:

PS, I liked the Peja deal solely because I believed it was too good to be true. Just considering on-the-court stuff, obviously Peja is nowhere near the player Ron is. But factoring everything else, because it really does matter, well there's a reason they broke off the trade, not us.

I could name 10 small forwards I would rather have than Peja, maybe 15 if I really thought about it. Pacers have two on their current roster not named Artest that I would rather have starting at small forward over Peja.

I'll leave your other comment alone

ChicagoJ
10-20-2005, 04:51 PM
I could name 10 small forwards I would rather have than Peja, maybe 15 if I really thought about it. Pacers have two on their current roster not named Artest that I would rather have starting at small forward over Peja.

I agree.

The difference is... how many SFs are in the league, 70 or so? I can think of 69 I'd rather have in the lockeroom/ on the team than Ron. Well, maybe not Glen Robinson or Eddie Robinson, if they're still in the league.


+++++++++


I'll leave your other comment alone

Sorry for the "feather ruffling". I couldn't resist. And yes, I know better.

Suaveness
10-20-2005, 04:53 PM
Sometime, when Artest is no longer in the picture, and DW and Bird talk as candidly about Ron as Jerry Krause has... maybe some of you will finally get a clue.

No, check that, you'll just label DW and Bird as "Haters." :rolleyes:

The problem with trying to trade Ron is that too many GMs around the league *do* know the real story - whatever it is. The NBA fraternity is dysfunctional and in-bred. I'm sure Brad Miller, for example, shared enough "Did I tell you about the time Ron..." stories to the Sacramento team that they knew what was up. Some happy PR from the Pacers won't go very far; Ron's going to have prove a negative - that he won't ever break a team's trust again, to have any trade value.


You're such a hater, Jay. I can't believe you don't like Ron. What has he ever done to you, huh? Huh?

In all seriousness, I think UB and I need to find something that we don't agree on. I'm surprised some of you haven't thought that maybe we're the same person....

Peja I never would have liked. I just don't like him as much. Sure, he would have helped offensively, but that's it. I have no clue how well he would have done on defense. I would have nightmares of Rip running circles around him

Tmac I would not have minded. I still would rather have Artest, but Tmac is a very good alternative. Of course, it's better than hater@Section 204...

Peck
10-20-2005, 05:07 PM
One Article that states that the Trade Rumor was more than Larry Inquiring by a credible source. Just one. Until then all it is is your opinion. And at least mine is backed up.

As I said, you would either believe it or you won't.

I can't blame you as I would hate the entire "you just have to trust me, I know" stance that we are taking with you.

Just go on believing that all is well in Pacers land & that everybody loves Ron.

RWB
10-20-2005, 05:10 PM
Of course don't forget one thing that has been mentioned many times....the salary Ron makes is an additional thing that makes the Pacers pause. I guess if they can put up with the lack of contribution Bender or Pollard make for the money expended, they're more willing to put up with Ronnie.

Shade
10-20-2005, 10:16 PM
Yawn. Once again Bob says he was "always right about Artest," and once again he is lying. I distinctly remember him writing an article shortly pre-brawl fully supporting Ron and saying we needed him to win a title.

IOW, I have no respect for blatant liars, especially those being paid to do so.

Roaming Gnome
10-20-2005, 10:36 PM
F%&C Kravitz!

Sorry, but Kravitz is given way too much rope to just remind everyone how much he hates Ron Artest.

I'm sure Kravitz has a wheel he spins on his cubical with what stories he wants to write about if:
-The Colts keep winning
-The Pacers keep winning
-Edgeren James continues to blow him off

The wheel includes topics like:
-Ron Artest, I told you so {or} better listen to me
-Indiana Stadium, It's a done deal, but it's a waste
-Bill Polian, does he deserve his job if the Colts don't win it all
-Tony Dungy, When does his free pass end
-Positive Fluff
-Negative Fluff
-ect. ect. ect....

ThA HoyA
10-20-2005, 10:53 PM
I guess that's because even before last season, even before things got out of hand, Bird privately told people he couldn't trust Artest and could never win an NBA title with Artest. Despite his public denials to the contrary, he was, in fact, hoping to deal Artest to the Sacramento Kings for Peja Stojakovic.

So, what changed between the start of last season and now?


The pacers felt what it is like to play without Artest. Simple you miss something until its gone and dont know how much value they have until they are unavailable for sometime.

McClintic Sphere
10-20-2005, 10:56 PM
I hope Kravitz gets his karmic comeuppance with a very small retirement home and Ron and Edge as his only caretakers.

Unclebuck
10-20-2005, 11:10 PM
Yawn. Once again Bob says he was "always right about Artest," and once again he is lying. I distinctly remember him writing an article shortly pre-brawl fully supporting Ron and saying we needed him to win a title.

IOW, I have no respect for blatant liars, especially those being paid to do so.



That is exactly right, there was a thread that proved this.

Kegboy
10-20-2005, 11:32 PM
Just to get things out of the way, :badger: is a tool, we all know he's a tool, the guy doesn't have a basic understanding of any sport except perhaps hockey. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt there considering all I know is it's cold, there's different colored lines that mean something or other, and you can beat the living crap out of anyone you want and only get the equivalent of a "timeout" for it. :dunno:

Now, that said, IF Larry really doesn't trust Ron and believes we can't win a title with him on our team, then I've lost what little, tiny, morsel of respect I had for the man. And no, not because that would make Bird a "hater", or some such nonsense. If Larry really believes we can't win with Ron, then he should have dumped him a long time ago. Screw equal or near-equal value. If the man is hurting your team, then you dump his ***, plain and simple. If you don't, you're letting your ego get in the way, which sounds very much like Larry Bird to me.