PDA

View Full Version : Very brief thoughts on the game vs. the Knicks....



Peck
03-07-2006, 11:36 PM
I have to be up very early in the a.m. so I am only going to hit the highlights or lowlights which is what they should be called.

First off let me state this, Eddy Curry is bigger than David Harrison. I've never been able to see them lineup next to each other so I thought David was a little bigger. Not after tonight, Curry is quite a bit wider & thicker while David is a little taller.

I still feel David is the better player but he didn't play all that great vs. Curry. On the other hand those who do not understand why some of us believe in Harrison need to look no further than Jerome James of the Knicks to know why we feel the way we do.

James has been in the NBA longer, is taller & is every bit as thick & wide as David. However that is where it ends, David is hands down the better player in every aspect of the game.

I don't want to pick on Saras & in fact I probably need to just leave it alone but I can't help it. The guy has got to quite trying the fancy no look pass for a dunk on the break when he has the open shot & then ends up blowing a 3 on 1 fast break. I about lost my mind when he did that. Other than that he was fine, nothing great but then again nobody on our team was great. But he has blown so many fast breaks this season it drives me insane.

Fred Jones needs to refund the Pacers his paycheck for that game. That is all there is to say about that. He did nothing right.

Pollard is about the only Pacer who played worth a crap & even he let Eddy Curry abuse him on the defensive end of the floor.

*****************WARNING WILD SPECULATION AHEAD***************

Has anyone else noticed lately how we are running more & more isolation plays. It doesn't matter who the player is, it could be Jax or Granger or whoever. But has anybody else noticed how our offensive rebounding has decreased & when you look at our spacing on the floor again we see one guy on one side of the rim with 4 other guys on the other side?

I say all of that to say this. He is preparing you for Jermaines return. In other words what you saw work so well for 7 games is not the same you will see when J.O. returns. It's not the way it is now which can only lead to about one conclusion. J.O. is not the problem with the half court ISO's, it's Rick.

I know one person who will be happy about this but I think the rest of us are sick to our stomach.

***********************END OF SPECULATION*****************


Like I said I gotta go so this is going to be it.

There was nothing good about this game, even Boomers dunks between the 3rd & 4th quarter were dedicated to a power pack member who just passed away. I'm pretty sure his name was David Allen Scott Jr. & for those who attended the games he was the one who flew higher than anybody & was far & away the best dunker (even better than Boomer) I don't know what happened to him btw.

Let's just move past this & beat Houston.

Last note, we still need a 10 day contract big man.

Bball
03-08-2006, 12:08 AM
I thought the player movement and crispness of the passing was less. Maybe that was the Knicks taking it away... or maybe it was us going away from it.

Not to take anything away from the Knicks, but why can't the Pacers beat the crappy teams? A couple of times a year and it's a fluke... but this is a trend. I'm not sure I have an answer to that question so I'd be curious to hear some opinions on it.

I'll add a prediction to the wild speculation (I've said this already but I doubt it was paid much attention... probably alot like now ;) )

This is Rick Carlisle's last season at the helm.

I believe Bird was serious when he made his long ago comment about the effectiveness of a coach being only a 3 year window. I also think the turmoil we've endured the past few seasons ruined any chance of breaking that. It's not to say that Carlisle hasn't done a very good job considering the hand he has been dealt... It is to say the style of ball he wants this team to play isn't a good fit with the players or the fans... or management. There have been too many comments from Bird that just made it seem like he and Rick weren't on the same page. Maybe they were signals to Rick? It probably doesn't help seeing the team and fans immediately respond to a different style and have success with it.

I have little to no doubt we will return to the ISO game when JO returns. We might even do it beforehand... Artest eventually went 'Artest'. There's no reason to think Carlisle won't go 'Carlisle' at some point.

As for the game at hand... When Tinsley entered I understood it to be a chance to give the team a different look and maybe a shot of energy. Lord knows we needed it. But then I looked around the court at the team around Tinsley. There was nothing to make me think we had a team on the court that had any hope of a comeback.

And Freddie.... Tonight he again was able to show us his trademarked move: Jump in the air with nowhere to go and no plan and throw the ball to the opposing the team. He has this move down. Don't they get kids to quit that stuff in HS... or Biddy Ball even?????

I'm trying to think of something good to say about the game but it was a blowout loss to a bottom feeder team. There's nothing good about that.

I will hope it was simply a motivated opponent catching the Pacers on an off night and move on to the next game. The Knicks vs the Pacers obviously means more to the lowly Knicks these days.

Sad news indeed about the Power Pack member.

-Bball

waterjater
03-08-2006, 12:21 AM
Reverted back to the Standard Pacers! ISO play and lackadaisacal play against an inferior opponent. These guys should forfeit their salary tonight.

Lets see, ball movement, balanced scoring, rebounding lanes, cuts to the basket for easy shots and teamwork lead to VICTORIES, yet we go back to the crap that loses to inferior opponents? Go figure.

We lost this game in the first quarter when we should have had a 30-12 lead at the end of 1 period. We missed just about every shot we took and had too much isolation.

If we in deed go back to that ISO BS, then I'm done as a fan. GO 1 on 5, throw up a bad shot while everyone stands and watches?!!!!!!!!!??? Great strategy....no rebounding lanes, nobody even attempting to get a rebound.

Losing to the Knicks when they were good was like getting a root canal, but losing to that crappy bunch of misfits is like getting sent to purgatory.

HOPEFULLY THIS WAS AN ABERRATION!
Not feeling good about it though.

Water

CableKC
03-08-2006, 02:17 AM
Do you guys think that the "new offense" with a full roster of players would stand a better chance in the playoffs compared to the "ISO" type of offense that we have always run in previous years?

I would like to believe that we can try something new with the full roster of players just to see can happen.....cuz we all know how well we did in the last couple of playoffs with the "old style" of offense.:rolleyes:

About Birds "way back when" comments about coaching being a 3 year window...I didn't know he said that. Was this a comment by Bird some time ago?

Regardless of when he said this.....I wouldn't be surprised if this is Carlisle's last season. Bird is gonna likely rebuild the entire team from the ground up....and I wouldn't be surprised if he will not try to change Carlisle's mind if he does step up and resign.

I won't complain if Carlisle stays....but won't complain if he decides to go. If it happens....here's hoping that Eric Musselman comes to Indy.:buddies:

Mac_Daddy
03-08-2006, 02:27 AM
I really have no idea what happened. I left to grab some dinner near the end of the third and the Pacers were down by two. When I returned, I saw that they were down by twenty... I just didn't bother to watch the rest.

Bball
03-08-2006, 02:33 AM
Do you guys think that the "new offense" with a full roster of players would stand a better chance in the playoffs compared to the "ISO" type of offense that we have always run in previous years?

I would like to believe that we can try something new with the full roster of players just to see can happen.....cuz we all know how well we did in the last couple of playoffs with the "old style" of offense.:rolleyes:

About Birds "way back when" comments about coaching being a 3 year window...I didn't know he said that. Was this a comment by Bird some time ago?

Regardless of when he said this.....I wouldn't be surprised if this is Carlisle's last season. Bird is gonna likely rebuild the entire team from the ground up....and I wouldn't be surprised if he will not try to change Carlisle's mind if he does step up and resign.

I won't complain if Carlisle stays....but won't complain if he decides to go. If it happens....here's hoping that Eric Musselman comes to Indy.:buddies:


When Bird signed on as coach of the Pacers he signed for 3 years and said (paraphrasing) that a coach is only effective for 3 years and then players begin tuning him out. And then he stuck by it and bowed out after 3 years.

Bird has recently talked about wanting to see the Pacers play a more Euro style of basketball. He's been doing a lot of scouting in Europe. He went to bat for Saras. There have been several comments that don't jive with what the Carlisle is historically known for. He's got his security blankets and I don't think he's going to give them up. I question if the players we have want to stand at the 3 point line another season and watch JO get most of the touches. If Bird wants a more Euro style of ball, how can anyone think Carlisle has a future here?

Hmmm what Pacer coaches in the Walsh era have lasted past 3 years?

-Bball

Will Galen
03-08-2006, 02:58 AM
This is Rick Carlisle's last season at the helm.

-Bball

Could be. It seems obvious that this group plays better when moving the ball. In fact that is true of everyone in the NBA. I can see playing a lot of isolations if you have a Kobe, James, or Wade, but the Pacers haven't had a good isolation player in years.

Someone needs to ask Rick on his show this Thursday why he persists in isolations when the team plays better when they move the ball.

D-BONE
03-08-2006, 06:29 AM
With you all on the return to dominance of isoball. I thought it was also quite visible in the last game, too. Excellent point about how more ball and player movement creates better offensive rebounding opportunities. The only thing I would say about the NY loss is that we missed a lot of open looks. Not going to win consistently with 35% FG. That's no excuse for overall lethargic play though.

owl
03-08-2006, 06:52 AM
New York has a large number of quick, offensive minded players and
last night they were on. I am tired of the Pacers having a bunch of
plodders especially in the backcourt. This team needs to add some
quickness. New York could turn into a dangerous team.


owl

D-BONE
03-08-2006, 06:57 AM
New York has a large number of quick, offensive minded players and
last night they were on. I am tired of the Pacers having a bunch of
plodders especially in the backcourt. This team needs to add some
quickness. New York could turn into a dangerous team.


owl

Nuthin but plodders round these parts. Do we have one guy that could even qualify as truly fast? Quick? Maybe DG or Fred?

Unclebuck
03-08-2006, 07:25 AM
Reason why the Pacers lose to bad teams so often: Pacers margin for error is very small, if they have a letdown of even 25% in their effort and intensity they can lose to anyone. Pacers don't have that one or two players who can bail them out, they need at least 7 or 8 guys all playing well.

That is the reason.

BillS
03-08-2006, 08:33 AM
The little of the game I saw presented something else - we stopped trying to do any kind of in-out game and just tried to get quick long-range bombs to fall.

They didn't, and we didn't get the rebounds.

DeS
03-08-2006, 08:50 AM
I agree with UB. Tonight almost every player had an off-night. I wonder if it's just such an unlucky night, or this has something to do with coaching? (I didn't saw the game and cannot comment it).
Also this is one of the rare cases when our bench was outplayed. The most stable weapon (which usually kills/outscores the oponents second unit) was empty tonight.

sixthman
03-08-2006, 09:07 AM
Reason why the Pacers lose to bad teams so often: Pacers margin for error is very small, if they have a letdown of even 25% in their effort and intensity they can lose to anyone.

Very legit point. Let's face it, to win we have to maximize our talent on any given night.

I also agree our style of play hasn't changed much. Jack has been encouraged to isolate consistently. Even Peja. I really haven't seen that much change in the offense and don't expect it when JO returns. I just hope they share and move the ball out of the isolations.

Agreed the young man with the Power Pack was exceptionally talented; But he also appeared like an exceptionally decent young man. He was obviously very popular with both the fans and his peer. He had a special manner that made him stand out - You can tell that from the comments about him on this board. Very sad news.

Outlaw
03-08-2006, 09:52 AM
I noticed alot more ISO plays last night. I am certain we will return to ISO ball soon as Rick is a control freak. Which means our rebounding will go down the tubes again.:rolleyes:

I am starting to lose interest in this season knowing we will probably be an early casualty in the playoffs. Right there just does not seem to be light at the end of the tunnel.The only thing that peaks my interest is Danny & David's progress.

AS far as Rick coming back next season IF he refuses to change then adios.

I guess I will say it here I WAS wrong about David Harrison. I said a few months back that I thought he was nothing more than a career backup. Well obviously I was wrong. :blush: I don't mind eating crow on this one as it tastes pretty good in this situation.:D

Strany
03-08-2006, 10:16 AM
*****************WARNING WILD SPECULATION AHEAD***************

Has anyone else noticed lately how we are running more & more isolation plays. It doesn't matter who the player is, it could be Jax or Granger or whoever. But has anybody else noticed how our offensive rebounding has decreased & when you look at our spacing on the floor again we see one guy on one side of the rim with 4 other guys on the other side?

I say all of that to say this. He is preparing you for Jermaines return. In other words what you saw work so well for 7 games is not the same you will see when J.O. returns. It's not the way it is now which can only lead to about one conclusion. J.O. is not the problem with the half court ISO's, it's Rick.

I know one person who will be happy about this but I think the rest of us are sick to our stomach.

***********************END OF SPECULATION*****************




As much as I hate the ISO stuff, one thing to keep in mind is that to continue to play good defense and use alot of motion on offense will eventually catch up to the legs, especailly when we are playing the schedule we are. At some point with so many games you either have to sacrifice on "D" or run some ISO's to allow players to keep there legs fresh. I think Dallas is also feeling some of this right now to.

Unclebuck
03-08-2006, 10:48 AM
20 years from now when the best coaches in Pacers history are discussed, Rick Carlisle will be always mentioned as one of the very best. He'l be up there with Slick and Larry Brown.

I just hope the next Pacers coach, is half as good as Rick

Brian
03-08-2006, 10:50 AM
If anyone actually believes that we are gonna keep the "run and gun O" when JO comes back you are out of your mind.Rick wont do it.No matter how much better it would be.

ChicagoJ
03-08-2006, 10:54 AM
Hmmm what Pacer coaches in the Walsh era have lasted past 3 years?

-Bball


Brownie - four years and the fourth year was of course, "The season we do not discuss".

Isiah Thomas. :yikes: . Need I say more?

Roy Munson
03-08-2006, 11:04 AM
I noticed alot more ISO plays last night. I am certain we will return to ISO ball soon as Rick is a control freak. Which means our rebounding will go down the tubes again.:rolleyes:



Rick is in control. For you to call him a freak for wanting to be in control is going too far. I'd much rather have a coach in control of his team than have one who can't or won't control his players.

But whether his strategy is right or wrong is a separate question. If he is wrong, that doesn't make him a control freak. It merely means that what he thought would work, didn't.

Also, consider that the Pacers weren't scrimmaging against air last night. Sure they were ONLY playing the Knicks, but they do have a fairly knowledgable coach who might have been successful in forcing the Pacers into a style that played to NY's advantage.

Fool
03-08-2006, 11:22 AM
You are equivocating on the phrase "in control". I would say that Rick has always liked to be in control of the game. I wouldn't say that Rick has always been in control of his players. Its also unclear why anyone should associate one type of control with the other (and looking at Phil Jackson would provide one with a seemingly effective counter example to doing so).

I will say this though. If Rick has watched the team be successful with a new style of play and his only real justification for returning to an older, less effective, style of play when J.O. returns is that he (Rick) is more comfortable with that style, then that's a mark against Rick. I would imagine Carlisle has more of a justification for returning to that style (if he is indeed doing so), but how legitament that justification is is up for debate.

Hicks
03-08-2006, 11:23 AM
I am watching the FSN tape of the game, and I didn't realize Fred Jones sprained his right thumb in the first half and was listed as "questionable" going into half-time.

Kegboy
03-08-2006, 11:25 AM
Part of me really wants to see Larry hire Dennis Johnson, his second choice 3 years ago, just so everyone can see just how badly Rick needed to go. :rolleyes:

Unclebuck
03-08-2006, 11:45 AM
Part of me really wants to see Larry hire Dennis Johnson, his second choice 3 years ago, just so everyone can see just how badly Rick needed to go. :rolleyes:



DJ was the second choice three years ago? . Not disagreeing with you, but I don't remember that.


Jay, Isiah was only here 3 years

Spicoli
03-08-2006, 11:49 AM
Jay, Isiah was only here 3 years


It just felt like 300. :D

Kegboy
03-08-2006, 11:59 AM
DJ was the second choice three years ago? . Not disagreeing with you, but I don't remember that.

Everyone figured Larry would hire Rick, but when he was asked about it, Larry said he was also interested in Dennis Johnson. When Johnson was hired in the NBDL, the press release had glowing statements from Larry about him.

ChicagoJ
03-08-2006, 12:00 PM
2000/ 2001 - lost to Philly
2001/ 2002 - lost to Jersey
2002/ 2003 - lost to Boston

Ooops. :blush:

That's right, he had a four-year contract and was fired before year #4.

He *would've* been here four years w/o Bird's intervention.

Outlaw
03-08-2006, 12:26 PM
Rick is in control. For you to call him a freak for wanting to be in control is going too far. I'd much rather have a coach in control of his team than have one who can't or won't control his players.

But whether his strategy is right or wrong is a separate question. If he is wrong, that doesn't make him a control freak. It merely means that what he thought would work, didn't.

Also, consider that the Pacers weren't scrimmaging against air last night. Sure they were ONLY playing the Knicks, but they do have a fairly knowledgable coach who might have been successful in forcing the Pacers into a style that played to NY's advantage.

I was not refering to Rick controling the players. I have no issue with that. I am talking about the offense and him wanting to call everyplay from his little card that he keeps in his pocket. That is too controling and not allowing your PG to asses the situation himself. And we know he trusts AJ.

It also takes away from the flow of the game.Not to mention it makes sooo predictable.:cool:

sixthman
03-08-2006, 12:49 PM
The Pacers of the first Zeke years would have driven Carlisle absolutely nuts. A rookie Jamaal Tinsley who was a zero defensively and totally unpredictable offensively and unable to hit an outside shot, the young JO, Al and JB, none of whom had a clue about how to play the game. Travis and Jalen were the other stability besides Reggie. Maybe Zeke deserves more credit. :wink:

Arcadian
03-08-2006, 12:59 PM
If these 3 years were Rick's tenue I'd feel bad for him. They have been very chaotic. I'd like to see him get one more year to see how he does with a roster that ends up the way it was planned to in the beginning. I think he is a winner who deserves that much.

As far as I am concerned each Pacer season he has gotten the team to over-achieve regardless of his coaching tendencies. That is rare among coaches.

Bball
03-08-2006, 01:05 PM
20 years from now when the best coaches in Pacers history are discussed, Rick Carlisle will be always mentioned as one of the very best. He'l be up there with Slick and Larry Brown.

I just hope the next Pacers coach, is half as good as Rick


Are you simply commenting on Rick's eventual departure or are you in fact agreeing with my prediction?

-Bball

ChicagoJ
03-08-2006, 01:08 PM
If these 3 years were Rick's tenue I'd feel bad for him. They have been very chaotic. I'd like to see him get one more year to see how he does with a roster that ends up the way it was planned to in the beginning. I think he is a winner who deserves that much.

As far as I am concerned each Pacer season he has gotten the team to over-achieve regardless of his coaching tendencies. That is rare among coaches.

I agree with all that He's gotten them to overachieve every year. The chaos has not been his fault. He deserves better.

He's truly brilliant at his long-term vision for each team he's coached.

He's one of the top coaches in the league, without a doubt. But he's also got a lot of room for growth before he's going to win a championship based on his personal coaching (on the other hand, he could ride a great team to a championship like Popovich has done.)

I'd love to have another three years from Rick in about a decade.

Bball
03-08-2006, 01:11 PM
Reason why the Pacers lose to bad teams so often: Pacers margin for error is very small, if they have a letdown of even 25% in their effort and intensity they can lose to anyone. Pacers don't have that one or two players who can bail them out, they need at least 7 or 8 guys all playing well.

That is the reason.

I can't skip over this answer.... You took the simple way out. We were losing to these teams even when JO was playing. The question is maybe better asked as to 'why' we continually suffer letdowns when playing (as their record would suggest) "bad" teams?

Once or twice and they are flukes.... but to continually do it suggests a pattern.

Is it because this team was so good not that long ago that they forget they aren't that team any longer and take these other teams too lightly? ...And if so, you'd think a couple of blowout losses would erase that. A void in team leadership maybe?

:dunno:

-Bball

Moses
03-08-2006, 01:27 PM
I don't want Rick gone unless they go back to running ISO's for Jax and dumping it into the post to JO on every play.

Knucklehead Warrior
03-08-2006, 01:32 PM
Interesting with his rep, that Larry Brown stayed here longer than anyone for the last 25 years.

Jack McKinney for 4 years around 1980 and Slick before that.

Unclebuck
03-08-2006, 01:44 PM
Are you simply commenting on Rick's eventual departure or are you in fact agreeing with my prediction?

-Bball



No I don't agree with you that this will be Rick's final season. He has one more year on his contract, and I fully expect him to get a 2 year extension this summer.

But he won't be the Pacers coach forever, and when he no longer is he'll be thought of more highly.

Unclebuck
03-08-2006, 01:54 PM
I can't skip over this answer.... You took the simple way out. We were losing to these teams even when JO was playing. The question is maybe better asked as to 'why' we continually suffer letdowns when playing (as their record would suggest) "bad" teams?

Once or twice and they are flukes.... but to continually do it suggests a pattern.

-Bball


The Pacers team this season needs to be broken into 3 separate teams. And in each case there were completely different reasons for the letdown. But right now the margin for error is much smaller than it was with team #1 described below.

1) The Pre-Artest trade demand team. That team was talented. J.O was playing, Jamaal was playing and so was Cro and Artest. Those 4 made up 4/5 of the starting lineup. Horrible chemistry on that team. They did play some very good games but also played some horrible games. See the game at Charlotte and several other games with poor chemistry and effort.

2) The post Artest trade demand, but pre-Artest trade. This team was in total state of flux. Players thought they were going to be traded and things were a mess.

3) Post Artest trade team. Stability came back. J.O., Jamaal, Cro were all out. The team played hard every night and developed a really nice chemistry. Talent was maximized.


We will be a 4th team soon with JT, J.O and Cro. If this new team can play hard, with good chemistry it could be excellent.


bball, in general every team has letdowns for a variety of reasons, certain really good teams are good enough to still win those games, this current pacers team is not good enough

Bball
03-08-2006, 02:25 PM
The Pacers team this season needs to be broken into 3 separate teams. And in each case there were completely different reasons for the letdown. But right now the margin for error is much smaller than it was with team #1 described below.

1) The Pre-Artest trade demand team. That team was talented. J.O was playing, Jamaal was playing and so was Cro and Artest. Those 4 made up 4/5 of the starting lineup. Horrible chemistry on that team. They did play some very good games but also played some horrible games. See the game at Charlotte and several other games with poor chemistry and effort.

2) The post Artest trade demand, but pre-Artest trade. This team was in total state of flux. Players thought they were going to be traded and things were a mess.

3) Post Artest trade team. Stability came back. J.O., Jamaal, Cro were all out. The team played hard every night and developed a really nice chemistry. Talent was maximized.


We will be a 4th team soon with JT, J.O and Cro. If this new team can play hard, with good chemistry it could be excellent.


bball, in general every team has letdowns for a variety of reasons, certain really good teams are good enough to still win those games, this current pacers team is not good enough

You make a good point that I hadn't considered... "Different teams".
It's not really the same Pacers losing these (supposedly) winnable games and as you say "every team has letdowns".

As a trend it is disturbing, but maybe it's not quite the 'trend' it seems to be when you consider the makeup of the team at different points of the season.

-Bball

owl
03-08-2006, 03:18 PM
Reason why the Pacers lose to bad teams so often: Pacers margin for error is very small, if they have a letdown of even 25% in their effort and intensity they can lose to anyone. Pacers don't have that one or two players who can bail them out, they need at least 7 or 8 guys all playing well.

That is the reason.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++

This translates into talent. The Pacers have too many slow, average talented
players and can be taken advantage of. Pacers need an additional, speedy
point guard and larger slashing scoring guard. Fred Jones is ok but his
size is an issue. I believe Rick realizes that the Pacers do not have the
players to play a free wheeling style and he may be right. Watch the Pacers
on a fast break and tell me how many times it ends in a missed shot or turnover. I cringe when Jackson leads the break.


owl

Unclebuck
03-08-2006, 03:43 PM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++

This translates into talent. The Pacers have too many slow, average talented
players and can be taken advantage of. Pacers need an additional, speedy
point guard and larger slashing scoring guard. Fred Jones is ok but his
size is an issue. I believe Rick realizes that the Pacers do not have the
players to play a free wheeling style and he may be right. Watch the Pacers
on a fast break and tell me how many times it ends in a missed shot or turnover. I cringe when Jackson leads the break.


owl


That is so true

D-BONE
03-08-2006, 04:14 PM
TRUE!! The only people I want leading a break on this team are the PGs. Everyone else only if it's a one-on-one scenario.

Kegboy
03-08-2006, 06:41 PM
Bball, I'm calling you out. Who do you want as coach, and do you think there's a chance in hell Larry would hire said coach?

Bball
03-08-2006, 06:54 PM
Bball, I'm calling you out. Who do you want as coach, and do you think there's a chance in hell Larry would hire said coach?


My prediction is based on Bird's comments and Carlisle's history. If Larry is ultra loyal to Carlisle, or doesn't believe the things he's been saying about wanting to see the Pacers play a more 'Euro style' of ball (as well as some of the other stuff (like when he commented that Artest should be allowed some 'room' (I don't remember his exact words but basically he was saying he should be allowed a bad shot here and there)) then UB could be right.

I'm just thinking that Bird's own words don't add up to Carlisle being here next year if taken at face value. Carlisle doesn't seem to be interested in a "Euro style" of ball and Bird certainly is on record as saying a coach loses his effectiveness after 3 years. ...Of course maybe he was just paving an excuse for his own exit 3 years later - Or maybe he really believes that. If so, I don't think things add up for Carlisle.

It's a shame that he really hasn't gotten a fair shake in all of this so far. 03-04 seems like a long time ago. Last year changed everything. The years weren't wasted, but they aren't what we all had hoped for.

It doesn't matter who I would want, I'm questioning if Carlisle is still who Bird wants.

I gather you think he is?

-Bball

Kegboy
03-08-2006, 07:05 PM
It doesn't matter who I would want, I'm questioning if Carlisle is still who Bird wants.

I gather you think he is?

-Bball

I have such little respect for Bird I don't care what he wants. I just figure out of his "boys", Rick's the best we're gonna get.

CableKC
03-08-2006, 07:24 PM
I was thinking of your post about Carlisle getting a "fair shake" and something dawned on me. Just because the Pacers haven't met expectations....regardless of how the offense is run or how substitutions are made.......should the 3-year rule apply to Carlisle after this season?

The first year that Carlisle coaches the Pacers.....there is no "season-altering" drama .......and we make it to the ECF in the 2003-2004 that ends with a boneheaded move by a dumb@ss player.

In his 2nd season....in the 2004-2005 season....we have the "drama to end all dramas" with the Brawl that essentially ruined the season....yet Carlisle and the rest of the survivors drags our sorry-@ss to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

In his 3rd season......we face yet another drama with Hurricane Artest that significantly alters the starting lineup while playing an entire month without the 2nd best player on the team....and yet we are still in the 6th playoff spot in the East.

Regardless of what style of play we play ( slow knuckleheaded "iso" plays for JONeal or some psuedo-Euro style of play )....is it truly time to give up on him? I really wish that we can see what would happen with Carlisle coaching the current lineup where there is no drama.

We have seen what Carlisle is capable of given a season with no "significant drama" and what he is capable of with "season-altering" dramas. I don't care what coach leads this team......because there is no coach out there that could have saved the last 2 seasons. There maybe a "3 year expiration date on coaches" ( according to Bird ), but I think that Carisle should have a "mulligan" for one more year.

CableKC
03-08-2006, 07:26 PM
I have such little respect for Bird I don't care what he wants. I just figure out of his "boys", Rick's the best we're gonna get.
Unless we can somehow get Eric Musselman.....then I am inclined to agree with you.....regardless of what type of offense Carlisle runs.

D-BONE
03-08-2006, 08:27 PM
I think Gene Shue is the answer!!;) Can we bring him out of reitrement?