PDA

View Full Version : No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY



Unclebuck
04-08-2006, 08:54 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/v-pfriendly/story/406776p-344401c.html


New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
No one listens to Larry & Rick

Friday, April 7th, 2006

If they were buddies, Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle would undoubtedly make it a point to meet at the Garden tonight and compare notes on a dangerous problem they share. They're both coaching players who have tuned them out. You can imagine the conversation:
Brown: I got this kid Robinson, and I know he's trying, but the other night I had to get on him 'cause Iverson busts him for 47 and the kid is out there showboating. So what does he do? He pulls a Steph on me. Our next game, he takes one shot. You know me. I need veteran guys who want to be coached and want to win. That's not this group. So I'm thinkin', why even stick around?

Carlisle: You think you've got problems, Lar? My guys haven't been listening to me for weeks. If the East weren't so bad, we'd be out of the playoffs. I just wish I still had Mike Brown on my staff to ride herd on these guys. Because I just can't get through to 'em.


We know, that conversation could never, ever happen. If Brown and Carlisle pass each other in the hallway and make eye contact, it's an upset. They're tried-and-true adversaries, stemming from Carlisle's removal in Detroit after the 2003 season. Carlisle has always suspected that while he was still coaching Detroit, the Pistons and Brown were busy cutting a deal.

But even those differences aside, Brown and Carlisle share the one problem coaches wouldn't wish on their worst enemies. When players turn a deaf ear to coaches in practice, film sessions and games, the pink slip usually is not far off.

The way Brown talked the other night, it almost sounded as if he wouldn't mind that happening. Yes, he made sure to say, "I'm not jumping ship here," which was a funny line from one of the great ship-jumpers in coaching annals. But more importantly, he did not deny the growing speculation around the league that he will throw up his hands, say no mas, and skip town. Maybe sooner than later.

"You've got to always examine that," he said.

By making that statement, Brown could be planting the seeds on two fronts for his departure. One, it could get James Dolan and Isiah Thomas to bite and get rid of him. If the Garden's boss and the Knicks' team president think after one season that hiring Brown was a mistake, then you can also see, on a second front, why Brown is openly thinking of an exit strategy. That way, teams that already know they'll be making changes in the offseason have been alerted.

It's like he's saying, Don't go filling those vacancies so fast.

One of those teams could be Indiana, where Brown once coached. As successful as Carlisle has been in his three seasons with the Pacers, even putting up with Ron Artest, injuries to Jermaine O'Neal and the riot in Auburn Hills and all its fallout, it's not like he hasn't had players tune him out before. He's never been a people person. To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.

Since March 1, the Pacers have fallen from fifth in the East, at 29-25, to 36-38 and only 1-1/2 games ahead of eighth-place Chicago and two games in front on ninth-place Philly. The knock on Carlisle is that he's too soft on his players, who are seen as some of the toughest guys in the league to manage.

But they're always toughest to deal with when they've stopped listening.

Shade
04-08-2006, 09:08 AM
Crappy article. Pure speculation.

rexnom
04-08-2006, 09:14 AM
Interesting read considering it's not the Star. Disregarding all the Brown comments, I have to say that I agree with a lot of the things said...even if I think Carlisle is a great coach. Maybe it's just time.

ChicagoJ
04-08-2006, 10:21 AM
-snip-
The knock on Carlisle is that he's too soft on his players, who are seen as some of the toughest guys in the league to manage.

But they're always toughest to deal with when they've stopped listening.

Right on.

He's coddled these guys way too much since the brawl; yet they've still tuned him out.

If TPTB don't make significant overhauls of both the coaching staff and player personnel, they've greatly underestimated the problem.

bulldog
04-08-2006, 10:54 AM
Right on.

He's coddled these guys way too much since the brawl; yet they've still tuned him out.

If TPTB don't make significant overhauls of both the coaching staff and player personnel, they've greatly underestimated the problem.

The sad part is how much he's stuck up for the guys who have seemed to quit on him the most: he defended Jax when people were critiscizing him, always gave Tins the starting job, he put Sarunas on the bench (when I'm sure there was management pressure to play him just cause of the hype), etc.

Roaming Gnome
04-08-2006, 12:26 PM
Crappy article. Pure speculation.

Not so fast, Shade... The coverage in The Star is so bad, that I will almost believe speculation in another paper over the Pacer's PR droppings that are in The Star.

Funny thing...After Mike Wells (scoop) broke several stories that put the Organization in a questionable light, we have not heard much of anything from him. Did the Pacers flex their muscles? I would have guessed scoop would be all over the team tuning Carlisle out and the Star would have something worth reading. I guess Wells was fitted for a muzzle after the Artest situation and is wearing it now!

Kegboy
04-08-2006, 12:42 PM
Crappy article. Pure speculation.

You said it.

Maybe I've missed something, but I've never seen any animosity between Rick and Larry. :shrug:

D-BONE
04-08-2006, 01:17 PM
Not so fast, Shade... The coverage in The Star is so bad, that I will almost believe speculation in another paper over the Pacer's PR droppings that are in The Star.

Funny thing...After Mike Wells (scoop) broke several stories that put the Organization in a questionable light, we have not heard much of anything from him. Did the Pacers flex their muscles? I would have guessed scoop would be all over the team tuning Carlisle out and the Star would have something worth reading. I guess Wells was fitted for a muzzle after the Artest situation and is wearing it now!

I wonder if it has to do with the fact that Wells doesn't write columns. In other words it's not his job, but rather Kravitz's who has had a couple fairly critical ones of the team.

This makes sense in as much as Wells's big scoop could be included in the more "newsy", reporting-type articles or Pacer notes sections he tends to do b/c Artest came directly to him offering quotes. In order to get something into his sports section articles, he'd need somebody on the team or close to it to communicate it to him in a more direct fashion that RC had lost them.

Also, in his game write-ups and Q&A on the web, while he doesn't come straight out and blast the team, his leads frequently have a bit of negativity or some little jab. However, it is subtle. Definitely not confiedent and straightforward.

I'm not defending Wells or the quality of the Star's Pacer coverage. He's certainly not letting the Pacers have it, but I do detect some between the lines digs, although mainly at their on-court performance.

Roaming Gnome
04-08-2006, 01:47 PM
I wonder if it has to do with the fact that Wells doesn't write columns. In other words it's not his job, but rather Kravitz's who has had a couple fairly critical ones of the team.

This makes sense in as much as Wells's big scoop could be included in the more "newsy", reporting-type articles or Pacer notes sections he tends to do b/c Artest came directly to him offering quotes. In order to get something into his sports section articles, he'd need somebody on the team or close to it to communicate it to him in a more direct fashion that RC had lost them.

Also, in his game write-ups and Q&A on the web, while he doesn't come straight out and blast the team, his leads frequently have a bit of negativity or some little jab. However, it is subtle. Definitely not confiedent and straightforward.

I'm not defending Wells or the quality of the Star's Pacer coverage. He's certainly not letting the Pacers have it, but I do detect some between the lines digs, although mainly at their on-court performance.

I was afraid when I wrote my comments about M. Wells (Scoop) that they would be taken as if I were referring to him as if he were a columnist. That was not my intention, but on a side note, The Star needs another columnist IN ADDITION to Kravitz. What I was getting at was him talking to the players and working for a story. Has the team shut him down, has he been told to stop digging...by his editors, or did he get a lot of flack for his work on the Artest deal? IMHO, certain players will tell you what is going on, and if the players tell you, it is not a column, but a news story.

I guess I'm just tired of reading between the lines when it comes to coverage of the Pacers. Many of markets don't have to do this, why do I have to do that in this market. I hate the way Kravitz waits till something is blatenly obvious in Pacer-ville before he comments on it, but at least he is making a comment, no matter how much it is to just stir the pot.

Hey, Indy Star...Go get a story for once!

Will Galen
04-08-2006, 02:16 PM
This article is nothing more than the writer pounding the same nails that get pounded here. What happens is someone on PD gets an idea, right or wrong, and expounds on it on here until other members pick it up and then the beat writers around the NBA start writing about it. The idea doesn't have to be right, just plausible.

I've maintained for sometime that some of the writers on here are as good as guys doing the same thing for a living. Also as bad in some cases.

And like here, some things he said don't even make sense. For instance; To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.

Anthem
04-08-2006, 02:42 PM
And like here, some things he said don't even make sense. For instance; To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.
Makes sense to me.

Will Galen
04-08-2006, 02:48 PM
I guess I'm just tired of reading between the lines when it comes to coverage of the Pacers. Many of markets don't have to do this, why do I have to do that in this market. I hate the way Kravitz waits till something is blatenly obvious in Pacer-ville before he comments on it, but at least he is making a comment, no matter how much it is to just stir the pot.

Hey, Indy Star...Go get a story for once!

Reading between the lines? The game is on television, there are recaps of the game, there are box scores, and extensive quotes.

I don't know what it is with fans today that believe they should read all the Pacers dirty laundry in the local newspapers. Not when said dirty laundry can hurt the team they root for. Theres distinctions of course when players get caught breaking the law, etc.

However, it seems to me what you and others are wanting and advocating is exactly what will lower a players trade value and thus hurt the Pacers.

I completely disagree with your position!

Will Galen
04-08-2006, 02:51 PM
Makes sense to me.


How so? This would have been Larry's 3rd season, not 2004. They won their championship in 2004 with Brown as coach. Read the paragraph again, it doesn't make sense.

I believe there would have probably been a mutiny this year, but I'm not giving them the championship this year until they earn it.

Hicks
04-08-2006, 03:07 PM
They're talking about RICK's third season (or what would have been his third season).

Will Galen
04-08-2006, 03:53 PM
Lets do this again.

This statement doesn't make sense. "To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship."

This is the 3rd season they are referring to. It doesn't make sense that if Detroit would have kept Larry Brown this year there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.

Yes there could have been a mutiny this year but it couldn't have effected 2004.

Los Angeles
04-08-2006, 04:03 PM
It doesn't make sense because you think they are talking about larry when they are talking about rick.

Will Galen
04-08-2006, 04:17 PM
It doesn't make sense because you think they are talking about larry when they are talking about rick.

AH! I stand corrected!

And it's a pet peeve of mine that people dont really read what is written. :blush:

And here I thought others were having reading comprehension problems! :blush:



(DUMB WILL, REALLY, REALLY, DUMB!)

Roaming Gnome
04-08-2006, 05:26 PM
Reading between the lines? The game is on television, there are recaps of the game, there are box scores, and extensive quotes.

I don't know what it is with fans today that believe they should read all the Pacers dirty laundry in the local newspapers. Not when said dirty laundry can hurt the team they root for. Theres distinctions of course when players get caught breaking the law, etc.

However, it seems to me what you and others are wanting and advocating is exactly what will lower a players trade value and thus hurt the Pacers.

I completely disagree with your position!

Well, taking your position...I guess all team news should be like Pacers.com soft and fluffy, instead of journalism at its finest! Indy deserves better, not the PR arm of the Pacers for news coverage. Sorry, Yellow journalism sucks!

Will Galen
04-08-2006, 06:33 PM
My position is I don't want stories printed that can hurt the Pacers. (With the exception of breaking the law, etc.)

If that is a fans position, then who is the fan thinking of, their self and their need to know, or the Pacers?

The publics right to know only extends to things that effect the public. It doesn't cover things that concern us that have no effect on us. In other words what a person wants to know doesn't mean he has the right to know.

I think wanting to know the news regardless of how it effects the Pacers is the same attitude some players have. Me first.

Kegboy
04-08-2006, 07:53 PM
My position is I don't want stories printed that can hurt the Pacers. (With the exception of breaking the law, etc.)

If that is a fans position, then who is the fan thinking of, their self and their need to know, or the Pacers?

The publics right to know only extends to things that effect the public. It doesn't cover things that concern us that have no effect on us. In other words what a person wants to know doesn't mean he has the right to know.

I think wanting to know the news regardless of how it effects the Pacers is the same attitude some players have. Me first.

I don't fall in the camp that feels the Star covers for the Pacers at every opportunity, or that we need somebody like Vecsey who constantly throws mud up against the wall to see what sticks.

However, I learned some things at the last forum party about just how bad things were between JO and Ron, well before the brawl. If I'd known what was going on, and that TPTB stuck their heads in the sand and thought they could coexist, I definitely would have stopped getting tickets well before I did.

For as much money as people throw at the Pacers, I think they have a right to have reasonable knowledge of what's what.

Hicks
04-08-2006, 08:00 PM
I don't fall in the camp that feels the Star covers for the Pacers at every opportunity, or that we need somebody like Vecsey who constantly throws mud up against the wall to see what sticks.

However, I learned some things at the last forum party about just how bad things were between JO and Ron, well before the brawl. If I'd known what was going on, and that TPTB stuck their heads in the sand and thought they could coexist, I definitely would have stopped getting tickets well before I did.

For as much money as people throw at the Pacers, I think they have a right to have reasonable knowledge of what's what.
Yeah. If I'd known that before last week, my optimism would have turned to :rain: much sooner.

SoupIsGood
04-08-2006, 08:02 PM
What'd you learn?

Hicks
04-08-2006, 08:04 PM
What'd you learn?

That's for people who show up to the party to know. :tongue:

SoupIsGood
04-08-2006, 08:11 PM
:tongue:

I bet JO had sinusitis

Roaming Gnome
04-08-2006, 09:22 PM
What'd you learn?

Something that The Star felt you didn't need to know about the team!!!

SoupIsGood
04-08-2006, 11:02 PM
Something that The Star felt you didn't need to know about the team!!!
Well, you're not exactly overflowing with details either. Maybe the Star made the right choice....?

Kegboy
04-08-2006, 11:14 PM
Well, you're not exactly overflowing with details either. Maybe the Star made the right choice....?

It'd just **** you off Soup. Better that you don't know.

/condescending

SoupIsGood
04-08-2006, 11:24 PM
It'd just **** you off Soup. Better that you don't know.

/condescending
:evillaugh

ChicagoJ
04-08-2006, 11:26 PM
Mr. Galen, I will never understand your position.

Its pretzel logic.

Do you want a fan magazine our journalism?

Seems to me you want to redefine journalism as a fan magazine.

:shrug:

Will Galen
04-09-2006, 12:11 AM
Mr. Galen, I will never understand your position.

Its pretzel logic.

Do you want a fan magazine our journalism?

Seems to me you want to redefine journalism as a fan magazine.

:shrug:


AHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!

Besides not being able to comprehend what I read, I now find that people don't comprehend what I write!


WeLl taKe ThAT! aNd saME tO u! (smerkle platter plop)

Hicks
04-09-2006, 12:20 AM
I'll call the priest.

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 12:28 AM
No, I comprehended exactly what you wrote.

Seems to me that you just don't like what it means when it comes back to you.

You want to dictate the terms of press coverage because you don't want to hear anything that you consider "potentially harmful."

Its like, in your world, Artest's behind-the-scenes fights with Carlisle and JO, and his myriad of other sins, would only be hurtful if to the Pacers if they made it to the press.

That's absurd, of course.

Or do you still not beleive that loose-lipped Jerry Krause was telling everyone about Ron's mental health. I've talked to Bulls season ticket and suite holders that knew what was going on.

Believe me, everybody involved with the league knows everybody else's dirty laundry, so if something makes it to the press they all shrug it off and say, "I wonder why it took so long to make it to the papers."

Like I said, that one's absurd.

I, for one, would rather have the truth for why the team I invest a lot of time and money into is stinking up the joint.

And I think those of us that are paying customers of the Pacers and the local newspaper deserve news, whether nice or not. Not fluffy stuff that should go into a fan magazine.

If that makes me "selfish", then sobeit.

I'm not hurting the Pacers by finding out what they are doing to hurt themselves. They're hurting themselves by hurting themselves. And as a fed-up fan that has kept my tickets for years after I moved out of Indy, I'm trying to figure out if I should continue or if these idiots are even worth it anymore.

SoupIsGood
04-09-2006, 12:37 AM
WeLl taKe ThAT! aNd saME tO u! (smerkle platter plop)

:rockon2:

Will Galen
04-09-2006, 06:46 AM
No, I comprehended exactly what you wrote.


From your reply it's obvious you did a lot of reading between the lines too. Some of that stuff you accused me of I never thought of. I'm not going to argue with you though. I had my say and I'm satisfied with what I said.