PDA

View Full Version : Vecsey on Carlisle



Will Galen
04-14-2006, 04:20 AM
Lots of food for thought here!

http://www.nypost.com/sports/64503.htm

CONSIDERING CARLISLE
peter.vecsey@nypost.com


April 14, 2006 -- CONSIDERING the per vasive Pacers conflict (players vs. coaches, players vs. players and assistant vs. assistant) that has been going on since early last season, it's bewildering Indiana's president of basketball operations, Larry Bird, didn't declare coach Rick Carlisle safe for next season until there were five games left on the schedule, until NBA columnists throughout the country had Carlisle in severe job jeopardy.
I'm not saying Bird's vocal support of his long-time friend/former assistant is justified. Still, had Bird thrown his authority behind Carlisle noticeably sooner, even the most perplexed players would've understood the won-lost record is on them, which may or may not have made them more coachable.

Maybe that was Warren LeGarie's message last week at the Portsmouth Tournament when a number of attendees witnessed Carlisle's San Francisco-based agent venting boisterously to Bird and Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh, who matched him salvo for salvo. Could it be LeGarie demanded to know why they haven't had his client's back? Several days later Bird issued just such a statement.

What a coincidence!



Blind allegiance or is Bird playing the right hand? From what I know, hear, read and see a convincing argument can be made for retaining or releasing Carlisle. Success under dire duress last season (44-38) and 161 wins versus 85 losses the previous three (50-32 both years with Detroit) notwithstanding, I suspect he'd earnestly concede he's not the easiest guy to relate to or play for. Carlisle's sense of humor, enjoyable company and impromptu piano playing in hotel lobbies are not exactly well-known facts outside an intimate circle I crashed in the mid-1980s during Rick's practice days with the Celtics. After road games on a two-week West Coast trip, I'd join Bird, Carlisle, Jerry Sichting and Bill Walton, my password, for dinner.

During the 1987-88 season, Rick Pitino needed a body badly. Fuzzy Levane recommended Carlisle, then hitched to Albany of the CBA. His first game as a Knick he notched 23 in victory. Levane's talent scouting genius and Carlisle's shooting skills were celebrated long into the a.m. My column that morning notified fans never to expect another such downpour. He scored 51 points in 25 additional appearances. To stay in halfway decent shape he'd play full court with me at Harvey World, 14th Street and First Avenue. Carlisle told me he framed the column and keeps it well positioned on his desk.

Carlisle concluded his playing days in '89-90, only good enough to get into five games with the Nets but sharp enough to strike Bill Fitch he had some coach in him. Ten years later he became a career assistant under Wild Bill, Chuck Daly, P.J. Carlesimo and Bird.

When Larry Legend left basketball to spitshine his Florida garage (we all have our favorite fetish) and play golf, and Walsh hired Isiah Thomas, it was time for Carlisle to confront the unavoidable. His condescending, unfriendly personality needed a charisma transplant.

After a year off, devoted as much to self-evaluation as TV analyst of the Sonics, he'd re-programmed himself and rehabilitated his perceived image enough to be hired as head coach of the Pistons. Two seasons later, despite winning back-to-back Central Division crowns, Carlisle was fired after disobeying owner Bill Davidson's order to start Tayshaun Prince over defensive specialist Michael Curry and inflate Mehmet Okur's minutes as well.

Carlisle valued what Prince could do, but didn't feel he was ready for prime time. More appreciably, he felt the rookie hadn't earned a promotion and Curry didn't deserve a demotion. Switching their roles, Carlisle believed, would've deeply damaged his credibility with the rest of the team.

Had Carlisle, of course, handled the touchy situation a little more wisely, a tad more delicately, he might still be coaching the Pistons. But that's not him. Yes, he was loyal to Curry, and, yes, the rest of the players might've looked at him funny when he upgraded Prince. But, maybe, just maybe, they might've grasped the long-term benefit to such a swap, something Davidson and Joe Dumars recognized; Carlisle's inflexibility often leaves him sightless.

His stubbornness has a lot to do with his Pacers problems. His toy soldiers loathe his robotic predictability, being coached by the numbers and their minutes regardless of how well they perform. His insensitivity and overall people skills aren't winning him many admirers, either. Why, for instance, would Carlisle announce the other day he was going to start Anthony Johnson even if Jamaal Tinsley wasn't hurt? Couldn't he have endorsed one player without indicting the other? What did he gain by embarrassing Tinsley, or was that the aim?

In other words, Carlisle has reverted to the Stepford Coach he was before his year layoff forced him to get a grip on reality.

Intriguingly, for someone deathly afraid to elevate Prince over Curry at the risk of estranging the others in Detroit, Carlisle has managed to alienate the majority of his Pacers players by reprimanding everyone at one time or another except Jermaine O'Neal.

Had Bird not called out his forged franchise player moments after defending Carlisle the regular season would almost be history and O'Neal's lack of leadership would still be untouched upon.

There's that and then there's this: I had lunch with Levane and Ed Krinsky, longtime coach at Westbury High and now director of operations of the USBL, a couple of days ago to commemorate Levane's 86th birthday. Not surprisingly, Carlisle's name came up.

Fuzzy fervently came to his rescue.

"After the season we brought him up to the Knicks he sent me a basket full of stuff and a note of thanks," Levane said. "In all my years as a coach and a scout he's the only player who ever sent me anything."

indygeezer
04-14-2006, 06:07 AM
You knew it was gonna happen sooner or later. Vescey being Vescey. Talk about predictable.


Shouting match huh? Why ain't I suprised DW can go toe-to-toe with anybody in a shouting match???

owl
04-14-2006, 07:09 AM
I can imagine Donnie having a discussion but I just can't imagine him
shouting. That just does not seem to be his personality. Of course the
discussion would include no wasted words.
I suspect as usual a lot of hyperbole by Vescey.


owl

D-BONE
04-14-2006, 07:12 AM
Vecsey's presentation of RC's coaching downside deserve's consideration. However, it loses a some creditiblity since it reads like a character assasination (of both RC and Fuzzy Levane). That's basically what it is dressed up as a pro-con argument as to what TPTB's decision making process could take into account.

How can you justify taking such great pains to point out that essentially "I predicted RC didn't have enough talent to play 5 minutes in this league". What a revelation! PV, what a genius prediction! I thought this column was about his coaching ability and arguments for and against him being retained here now? I find this point completely irrelevant.

Anyway, yes RC is probably a tough coach to play for due to his lack of flexibility. I bet Vecsey is well known for his wonderful personality, too. Little too much personal agenda for me to really take seriously despite a few (and I emphasize few) points of interest/new material surrounding the situation.

And I'll add that I'm not a keep RC at all costs guy. I would not be one iota sad to se him sent packing as long as the same can be said of some of the players.

RWB
04-14-2006, 07:55 AM
Maybe that was Warren LeGarie's message last week at the Portsmouth Tournament when a number of attendees witnessed Carlisle's San Francisco-based agent venting boisterously to Bird and Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh, who matched him salvo for salvo.
"

Now I have to wonder, did Rick's agent feel the need to do this on his own or has Rick been talking to LeGarie? If the latter then things continue to run deeper and deeper with this team and truthfully I'd be happy. At least that means everyone and everything is being scrutinized.

Hopefully the dirty laundry will be cleaned from top to bottom this summer.

Unclebuck
04-14-2006, 08:40 AM
Carlisle has managed to alienate the majority of his Pacers players by reprimanding everyone at one time or another except Jermaine O'Neal.

Had Bird not called out his forged franchise player moments after defending Carlisle the regular season would almost be history and O'Neal's lack of leadership would still be untouched upon.




To me this is the most significant part of the column

MagicRat
04-14-2006, 08:44 AM
Now I have to wonder, did Rick's agent feel the need to do this on his own or has Rick been talking to LeGarie? If the latter then things continue to run deeper and deeper with this team and truthfully I'd be happy. At least that means everyone and everything is being scrutinized.

Hopefully the dirty laundry will be cleaned from top to bottom this summer.

As I posted in another thread, according to Mitch Lawrence Rick asked for an extension a couple of weeks ago and was turned down. This may have something to do with their conversations at Portsmouth......


assistant vs. assistant

Did Chad Forcier sucker-punch Dan Burke over who gets to sit with Stacey on the postgame show?

Unclebuck
04-14-2006, 08:54 AM
As I posted in another thread, according to Mitch Lawrence Rick asked for an extension a couple of weeks ago and was turned down. This may have something to do with the their conversations at Portsmouth......



Did Chad Forcier sucker-punch Dan Burke over who gets to sit with Stacey on the postgame show?



I missed that. One thing I do know is either the Pacers need to fire Rick or give him an extenstion, those are the only two choices.

Will Galen
04-14-2006, 08:59 AM
I missed that. One thing I do know is either the Pacers need to fire Rick or give him an extenstion, those are the only two choices.

Disagree. When you don't know what you want to do you don't make either of those choices. The third choice is you wait.

Unclebuck
04-14-2006, 09:08 AM
Disagree. When you don't know what you want to do you don't make either of those choices. The third choice is you wait.



When I say fire Rick I don't mean right now, I mean during the offseason, sorry I wasn't really clear about that

Ragnar
04-14-2006, 09:24 AM
Disagree. When you don't know what you want to do you don't make either of those choices. The third choice is you wait.

You cant go into next season with a lame duck coach. Especially one most of the players hate. You either trade all the players or you replace the coach. Giving Rick an extension would tell the players that no matter what Rick is going to be here so get used to it.

pacerwaala
04-14-2006, 09:33 AM
Giving Rick an extension would tell the players that no matter what Rick is going to be here so get used to it.

That is exactly what the present group of punks (except for two or three) that we have on this team deserve and need.

Personally, I would keep Rick for the long haul but we need better assistants. Seems like they do not contribute anything except counting time outs and fouls to give.

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 09:44 AM
You knew it was gonna happen sooner or later. Vescey being Vescey. Talk about predictable.


Shouting match huh? Why ain't I suprised DW can go toe-to-toe with anybody in a shouting match???

I love it when someone uses "ain't" in a criticism of a writer.

Once again a columnist is posted and we can't get through a short thread without at least a few of you criticizing him.

I FOR ONE AM GRATEFUL THAT SOMEONE IS ACTUALLY DOING SOME REPORTING AND INVESTIGATING... damn shame it comes far too infrequently from the Star... but wait, Kravitz had a few good articles this week - but he is a hack. My response: No he ain't.

ChicagoJ
04-14-2006, 09:54 AM
Love him or hate him, good old Peter gets us talking.

Kegboy
04-14-2006, 10:00 AM
Did Chad Forcier sucker-punch Dan Burke over who gets to sit with Stacey on the postgame show?

Wouldn't you?

If this did happen, it would have to have been a sucker punch. Burke could take Babyface Forcier any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

brichard
04-14-2006, 10:04 AM
I love it when someone uses "ain't" in a criticism of a writer.

Once again a columnist is posted and we can't get through a short thread without at least a few of you criticizing him.

I FOR ONE AM GRATEFUL THAT SOMEONE IS ACTUALLY DOING SOME REPORTING AND INVESTIGATIONG... damn shame it comes far too infrequently from the Star... but wait, Kravitz had a few good articles this week - but he is a hack. My response: No he ain't.

But hasn't Vescey deserved a little bit of criticism? I mean what percentage of his stuff is actually true? You describe people like Kravitz as a bomb thrower and then you wonder why people send some criticism their way?

Maybe the Indy media is a little soft and cuddly for some of you guys, but as has been pointed out, a tough media environment (ie New York) isn't exactly a haven for championships. There is a reason I live in the Mid-west vs. the East coast, and the poisonous media environment is one more thing that would keep me here.

RWB
04-14-2006, 11:11 AM
Burke could take Babyface Forcier any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

:D Have you noticed Burke never smiles? How often have you seen Rick or Kevin O smile? Forcier appears to be the only suit that enjoys being there.

RWB
04-14-2006, 11:12 AM
There is a reason I live in the Mid-west vs. the East coast, and the poisonous media environment is one more thing that would keep me here.

This of course begs the question.....What have you been doing that makes you concerned about the media???? :devil:

brichard
04-14-2006, 11:17 AM
This of course begs the question.....What have you been doing that makes you concerned about the media???? :devil:


I suppose you would need a little more background for that to make sense. Kravitz is a guy who is a little more negative and blue than your typical Indy Star writer. The Anti-Walsh legion rejoices with any and all criticism of him and clink their glasses as they each say "It is about time!"

So, I am no fan of Kravitz, and I liken him a bit more to what you see in the East coast writers. I will agree with him on occassion, but you know what they say about the blind squirrel.... :cool:

indygeezer
04-14-2006, 11:40 AM
I love it when someone uses "ain't" in a criticism of a writer.

Once again a columnist is posted and we can't get through a short thread without at least a few of you criticizing him.

I FOR ONE AM GRATEFUL THAT SOMEONE IS ACTUALLY DOING SOME REPORTING AND INVESTIGATING... damn shame it comes far too infrequently from the Star... but wait, Kravitz had a few good articles this week - but he is a hack. My response: No he ain't.


I'm sorry if I offended your sensibilites Doug. I frequently lace my short comments with colloquialisms such as "ain't", "yer", "dontcha", and "wanna" just for effect. It is part of my personna of an illiterate cornbilly...a native born Hoosier if you will. If you wish, I can write as a PhD Microbiologist. Would that make you feel better?
As for what I had to say........no, nevermind.

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 12:02 PM
There are a number of you who have a knee jerk reaction to any critical word or any word that you do not like.

A COLUMNIST'S JOB IS TO GET YOU TO THINK!!!!

I am sorry if that is so offensive to you all.

As far as Vescey - when it comes to the Pacers - it has been well documented that he has some pretty good inside sources.

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 12:17 PM
I suppose you would need a little more background for that to make sense. Kravitz is a guy who is a little more negative and blue than your typical Indy Star writer. The Anti-Walsh legion rejoices with any and all criticism of him and clink their glasses as they each say "It is about time!"

So, I am no fan of Kravitz, and I liken him a bit more to what you see in the East coast writers. I will agree with him on occassion, but you know what they say about the blind squirrel.... :cool:

He RARELY criticizes Walsh

This is not about Walsh - you are wrong

I get fed up with people who just criticize an opinion column as being drivel, a hack job, this or that.

You guys - it is their job to write a column - which by definition, is an opinion. If it is his role to go over the top and be devil's advocate then so be it. You need some reason to read that paper - be it to make you angry or agree - at least it gets you thinking. I know thinking is not always popular.

YET STILL the media in Indy was way too easy on the Colts, Manning, and Dungy.

indygeezer
04-14-2006, 12:18 PM
There are a number of you who have a knee jerk reaction to any critical word or any word that you do not like.

A COLUMNIST'S JOB IS TO GET YOU TO THINK!!!!

I am sorry if that is so offensive to you all.

As far as Vescey - when it comes to the Pacers - it has been well documented that he has some pretty good inside sources.

Documented by whom? Anybody who really knows or just well thought out speculation, but speculation none-the-less?

Please note that my use of the word "ain't" came within the comment regarding DW's ability to argue and NOT within the Vescey comment. As for the Vescey comment, I was thinking of a thread from earlier in the week which asked when this column would surely appear, and just like clockwork, the predictable happend. Personnally, I don't care what any hack writers say anymore. They all fill their columns with platitudes/cliches and nothing of importance to say. I go back to what I heard Benner say a few years ago on the radio...."it's all about the pub" IOW, get em to read you, good, bad or indifferent, it is all good.

D-BONE
04-14-2006, 12:21 PM
There are a number of you who have a knee jerk reaction to any critical word or any word that you do not like.

A COLUMNIST'S JOB IS TO GET YOU TO THINK!!!!

I am sorry if that is so offensive to you all.

As far as Vescey - when it comes to the Pacers - it has been well documented that he has some pretty good inside sources.

My only dislike was it was too hatchet-job like. Present the argument at the Portsmith camp and present both sides of the retain/fire RC debate. Point out that this may contradict Bird's apparently positive pro-RC message.

An I told you so on his unsuccessful NBA career and corresponding dig to a scout are not pertinent to the matter at hand. Superfluous ego inflation.

As for making us think, Well, IMO it's an interesting tidbit, but I did not take Bird's vote of confidence for RC as absolute truth. Yes, they're pals so that leads one to believe he'll be around. However, nothing is ever 100% certain. There's always a chance.

Ragnar
04-14-2006, 12:21 PM
Peter is more often than not right on the money when it comes to the Pacers. He lets us in on a lot more than we ever get out of the star.

Anthem
04-14-2006, 12:23 PM
There are a number of you who have a knee jerk reaction to any critical word or any word that you do not like.

A COLUMNIST'S JOB IS TO GET YOU TO THINK!!!!
Why should we think about Badger's articles if he can't be bothered to?

Arcadian
04-14-2006, 12:29 PM
Here's the question is JO to blame that Rick doesn't say anything to him? And if that is creating a rift between the players and Rick, couldn't it undermine JO's ablility to lead? I'm all for believing that JO isn't a natural leader but is what Rick doing making the job tougher?

Bball
04-14-2006, 12:35 PM
Here's the question is JO to blame that Rick doesn't say anything to him? And if that is creating a rift between the players and Rick, couldn't it undermine JO's ablility to lead? I'm all for believing that JO isn't a natural leader but is what Rick doing making the job tougher?

Well, assuming Vecsey is accurate here, what we don't know is why Carlisle takes a different tact with JO. Could it be he's reacted unfavorably in the past?

Could it be a failed attempt not to draw attention to JO's lack of detail on the court?

I suppose there could ba a 1000 reasons, some questionable, some good, some bad... I wouldn't say that there is a 100% chance that JO deserves no blame on it tho. It could be JO's fault somehow, maybe a reporter just needs to scratch the surface to answer the question "why?"

...or it could be Carlisle's failing... Maybe a holdover from replacing Isiah (since we know how JO felt about Isiah... at least publically).

And it could be a sign of why Carlisle and JO can't coexist any more than Artest and JO could.
-Bball

RWB
04-14-2006, 12:39 PM
Well, assuming Vecsey is accurate here, what we don't know is why Carlisle takes a different tact with JO.

-Bball

Could it be....'You cover my back and I'll cover your back.'

D-BONE
04-14-2006, 12:39 PM
Here's the question is JO to blame that Rick doesn't say anything to him? And if that is creating a rift between the players and Rick, couldn't it undermine JO's ablility to lead? I'm all for believing that JO isn't a natural leader but is what Rick doing making the job tougher?

Probably. However, the big problem is you've got your coach who's not really leading all too well and a player ordained as the leader who doesn't lead well anyway. It adds up to a leadership problem. The two most obvious candidates aren't capable.

Means you've gotta go get one or hope one emerges. I would say that makes both quasi-leaders potentially expendable.

brichard
04-14-2006, 12:44 PM
He RARELY criticizes Walsh

This is not about Walsh - you are wrong

I get fed up with people who just criticize an opinion column as being drivel, a hack job, this or that.

You guys - it is their job to write a column - which by definition, is an opinion. If it is his role to go over the top and be devil's advocate then so be it. You need some reason to read that paper - be it to make you angry or agree - at least it gets you thinking. I know thinking is not always popular.

YET STILL the media in Indy was way too easy on the Colts, Manning, and Dungy.


You are replying to a post that was never directed at you, so first of all let me clear that up. My point to RWB was to explain why I could like the Indy media in general and not like a guy like Kravitz. In that explanation I highlighted that the anti-Walsh regime loved him and when I use the term "criticism of him" I am incorporating the entire team. After all, a critique of hanging on to Artest rest at the feet of whom? And the Anti-Walsh regime does seem to like his columns, does it not? Anyway, that sure is what I have read here since he has arrived.

And just b/c a guy goes over the top, it doesn't mean he is good at what he does or that it justifies what many feel is substandard writing. Don Fisher and Dick Vitale are both announcers who can be filled with emotion. Yet I like Fisher very well and I'm not a fan of Vitale. There are good 'Bomb throwers" and bad ones. And it could be that I just don't like the role of the bomb thrower, whether he is "just doing his job" or not still won't change the fact that I will like or dislike a column based on personal taste.

After all the adversity he had been through, I don't care how poor of a job he did coaching, there is no way you can criticize Dungy. I just think it would be very low class and received VERY poorly here in the Bible belt. The man's son had just died and there are more important things than sports.

Manning on the other hand deserves lots of criticism. He makes the dough, he calls many of his own plays which adds a little pressure when he calls the wrong ones, and he just does a terrible job in the playoffs. I agree that they were too soft on Manning. He had his defense this year, so no excuses.

Los Angeles
04-14-2006, 12:48 PM
My favorite part of this thread was geezer's use of the word "cornbilly".

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

brichard
04-14-2006, 12:48 PM
I'm sorry if I offended your sensibilites Doug. I frequently lace my short comments with colloquialisms such as "ain't", "yer", "dontcha", and "wanna" just for effect. It is part of my personna of an illiterate cornbilly...a native born Hoosier if you will. If you wish, I can write as a PhD Microbiologist. Would that make you feel better?
As for what I had to say........no, nevermind.

I feel like I am back at the Star again when the grammar police arrive. Sheesh! :cool:

This is a sports board, not an English board. If so, I'm going to have to re-type a lot of posts!

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 01:18 PM
You are replying to a post that was never directed at you, so first of all let me clear that up. My point to RWB was to explain why I could like the Indy media in general and not like a guy like Kravitz. In that explanation I highlighted that the anti-Walsh regime loved him and when I use the term "criticism of him" I am incorporating the entire team. After all, a critique of hanging on to Artest rest at the feet of whom? And the Anti-Walsh regime does seem to like his columns, does it not? Anyway, that sure is what I have read here since he has arrived.


Just so I know the rules - can I be anti-Walsh AND like Artest?

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 01:18 PM
I feel like I am back at the Star again when the grammar police arrive. Sheesh! :cool:

This is a sports board, not an English board. If so, I'm going to have to re-type a lot of posts!

No grammar police (other than Anthem).

If you are going to call someone out as being an idiot - don't use the word ain't in the same post.

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 01:20 PM
Why should we think about Badger's articles if he can't be bothered to?

That is an inaccurate statement. And perhaps you should think before you post.

He is a good writer.

Disagree with his point of view - but he is so much better than Robin Miller, Bill Benner, or anyone Indy has had that I can remember.

brichard
04-14-2006, 01:50 PM
Just so I know the rules - can I be anti-Walsh AND like Artest?


No. :cool:

brichard
04-14-2006, 01:53 PM
No grammar police (other than Anthem).

If you are going to call someone out as being an idiot - don't use the word ain't in the same post.


If you choose non-traditional words like ain't, then I think it is perfectly acceptable to use the word ain't if it is part of your chosen venacular. For example, a Texas oil tycoon could yell "My accountant is an idiot and ain't fit to be a CPA.." and then show the folly of the accountant.

Now, if you are saying "That guy ain't got not understanding of grammor." Well, now I would totally agree with you. :cool:

CableKC
04-14-2006, 02:05 PM
Lots of food for thought here!

http://www.nypost.com/sports/64503.htm

CONSIDERING CARLISLE
peter.vecsey@nypost.com

Carlisle valued what Prince could do, but didn't feel he was ready for prime time. More appreciably, he felt the rookie hadn't earned a promotion and Curry didn't deserve a demotion. Switching their roles, Carlisle believed, would've deeply damaged his credibility with the rest of the team.

Had Carlisle, of course, handled the touchy situation a little more wisely, a tad more delicately, he might still be coaching the Pistons. But that's not him. Yes, he was loyal to Curry, and, yes, the rest of the players might've looked at him funny when he upgraded Prince. But, maybe, just maybe, they might've grasped the long-term benefit to such a swap, something Davidson and Joe Dumars recognized; Carlisle's inflexibility often leaves him sightless.

It got me thinking about why we often see our young players like Granger, Harrison and ( at times ) Sarunas get significantly less minutes or even pulled from the course of the game regardless how well they are doing in favor of the veteran players. Similiar to the Tayshaun Prince / Michael Curry situation in Detroit.....I'm wondering if Carlisle looks at the younger players ( or in Sarunas' case.....a player with little NBA experience ) as players that haven't earned their "stripes" and therefore shouldn't get more minutes for fear of ruffling feathers among the rest of the veterans on the team. My guess is that Carlisle is the type that feels that he should not simply handout minutes to the younger players....regardless of how well they are doing....cuz he feels that they have to earn it.

Hopefully this simply means that we will begin to see solid consistent minutes for Granger, Harrison and Sarunas in the 2006-2007 season ( assuming that he is still here and the PG situation has been resolved ) if Carlisle is still here.

indygeezer
04-14-2006, 02:07 PM
No grammar police (other than Anthem).

If you are going to call someone out as being an idiot - don't use the word ain't in the same post.


Where did I call Vescey an idiot? You should read what you are condemning before you condemn it DiO. I said Vescey was being Vescey. That could just as easily mean he was being his usual over-the-top self, or it could mean something else entirely. But I did not call him an idiot. I did however call him predictable and given the thread earlier in the week that predicted this article, he was predictable.

Pot meet kettle, kettle meet pot.

Jermaniac
04-14-2006, 02:14 PM
Carlisle's inflexibility often leaves him sightless.

His stubbornness has a lot to do with his Pacers problems. His toy soldiers loathe his robotic predictability, being coached by the numbers and their minutes regardless of how well they perform. His insensitivity and overall people skills aren't winning him many admirers, either. Why, for instance, would Carlisle announce the other day he was going to start Anthony Johnson even if Jamaal Tinsley wasn't hurt? Couldn't he have endorsed one player without indicting the other? What did he gain by embarrassing Tinsley, or was that the aim?

Did I write this?

Ohh man Vescey hit it right on the head. God Bless him.

ONE MORE YEAR OR RICKY WOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOO. This man cant coach a rebuilding team cause he is going to forefit games because he wont want to play rookies.

Doug in CO
04-14-2006, 06:31 PM
You knew it was gonna happen sooner or later. Vescey being Vescey. Talk about predictable.


Shouting match huh? Why ain't I suprised DW can go toe-to-toe with anybody in a shouting match???

Whether you called him an idiot, discredited him, or whatever... it was implied that you think what he wrote is crap, drivel, worthless- you do not like what he wrote.

Meanwhile, it is the most solid piece of journalism we have seen in months regarding the Pacers

Kegboy
04-14-2006, 08:13 PM
Forcier appears to be the only suit that enjoys being there.

Well, yeah. He just hit puberty, so that purty Miss Stacy makes him feel all funny inside.

brichard
04-16-2006, 08:41 AM
Whether you called him an idiot, discredited him, or whatever... it was implied that you think what he wrote is crap, drivel, worthless- you do not like what he wrote.

Meanwhile, it is the most solid piece of journalism we have seen in months regarding the Pacers


And this is strictly your opinion. You have a right to your's and geezer has a right to his. How solid a piece of journalism ranks is in the eyes of the beholder.

grace
04-16-2006, 11:05 AM
Whether you called him an idiot, discredited him, or whatever... it was implied that you think what he wrote is crap, drivel, worthless- you do not like what he wrote.

I think anything Vescey writes is a load of crap, but that's just my opinion.

If you held a gun to my head and told me I had to either read :kravitz: or Vescey I'd probably take :kravitz:. No, on second thought I'd let you shoot me.

PacerMan
04-16-2006, 11:29 AM
Just so I know the rules - can I be anti-Walsh AND like Artest?

Oh HELL no!!!!!!!!

PacerMan
04-16-2006, 11:32 AM
It got me thinking about why we often see our young players like Granger, Harrison and ( at times ) Sarunas get significantly less minutes or even pulled from the course of the game regardless how well they are doing in favor of the veteran players. Similiar to the Tayshaun Prince / Michael Curry situation in Detroit.....I'm wondering if Carlisle looks at the younger players ( or in Sarunas' case.....a player with little NBA experience ) as players that haven't earned their "stripes" and therefore shouldn't get more minutes for fear of ruffling feathers among the rest of the veterans on the team. My guess is that Carlisle is the type that feels that he should not simply handout minutes to the younger players....regardless of how well they are doing....cuz he feels that they have to earn it.

Hopefully this simply means that we will begin to see solid consistent minutes for Granger, Harrison and Sarunas in the 2006-2007 season ( assuming that he is still here and the PG situation has been resolved ) if Carlisle is still here.

My guess is Carlisle (or other coaches) couldn't care less whether a rookie has paid their dues or not IF they can help the team more than other players. They are with these guys EVERY DAY, practices, games, training room, lockerroom, etc
Young guys make more mistakes and don't know all the things that help a lot in this league. After a few years you know a WHOLE bunch more.
Don't think it's any more complicated than that.

Roaming Gnome
04-16-2006, 12:14 PM
My guess is Carlisle (or other coaches) couldn't care less whether a rookie has paid their dues or not IF they can help the team more than other players. They are with these guys EVERY DAY, practices, games, training room, lockerroom, etc
Young guys make more mistakes and don't know all the things that help a lot in this league. After a few years you know a WHOLE bunch more.
Don't think it's any more complicated than that.


Oh, that's why an aging Michael Curry would start over T. Prince in Detroit. Also, Didn't Detroit nearly lose a 1st round series to 8th seeded Orlando a few years back due to the fact that Carlisle was so stubborn in using that aging vet, instead of the more talented Prince?

I'm sure Carlisle seen what Prince could do in EVERY DAY practices, games, training room, lockerroom, etc, but still used Curry.

Kinda makes his firing in Detroit justified!

CableKC
04-16-2006, 12:20 PM
My guess is Carlisle (or other coaches) couldn't care less whether a rookie has paid their dues or not IF they can help the team more than other players. They are with these guys EVERY DAY, practices, games, training room, lockerroom, etc
Young guys make more mistakes and don't know all the things that help a lot in this league. After a few years you know a WHOLE bunch more.
Don't think it's any more complicated than that.
I would hope that is the case......but that would not explain why Carlisle doesn't give Granger or Harrison the needed minutes...when SJax is shooting nothing but bricks or isn't willing to defend a bedpost ( and therefore bring in Granger )...or when we play a team with no frontline and he keeps players Croshere and JONeal on the floor ( and therefore not bring in someone like Hulk who could probably cause some mismatches on the offensive end ).

IMHO.....Carlisle plays players that he trusts and is comfortable with. He doesn't play rookies/sophmores that are still learning that is more likely to make mistakes then veterans that is likely to not do something stupid.

Bball
04-16-2006, 12:41 PM
My guess is Carlisle (or other coaches) couldn't care less whether a rookie has paid their dues or not IF they can help the team more than other players. They are with these guys EVERY DAY, practices, games, training room, lockerroom, etc
Young guys make more mistakes and don't know all the things that help a lot in this league. After a few years you know a WHOLE bunch more.
Don't think it's any more complicated than that.

You learn the most by being out on the court. You don't have to be thrown into a major prominent role necessarily tho. Carlisle either has no eye for, or patience with, younger players and prefers his veterans.

Sometimes you have to live with a few mistakes, use them as teaching opportunities, to see a player reach their potential.

It's different when the players they'd replace are in their prime and successful... but Carlisle has shown that is not always the case. He'll sit an arguably better all around player over a veteran until he gives the veteran every chance in the book... and then some... to lose/keep his spot.

-Bball

Unclebuck
04-16-2006, 12:44 PM
OK who cares about what Rick did in Detroit, when has he not been willing to develop a young player who is worth it. I see Granger playing a ton and at the end of games.

larry
04-16-2006, 12:47 PM
Peter is more often than not right on the money when it comes to the Pacers. He lets us in on a lot more than we ever get out of the star.
I have always liked his reports & articles. I think he was close to Reggie. His departure may mean few Pacer articles in the future. I do wish Vescey was on TV more.

PS To the guy crying about somebody using ain't. Enjoy me using ur instead of your,
u instead you,
4 instead for,
and so on.
Ur on a forum 4 Pacer fans who use this site 4 enjoyment.

larry
04-16-2006, 12:58 PM
RC cola never punishes JO? True, but I have yet to see him bench or go at Sjax ever. Even when the whole crowd moans when they know he's gonna go 1 on 1 & put up an ugly brick in the closing seconds. That routine is getting comical

ChicagoJ
04-16-2006, 09:52 PM
OK who cares about what Rick did in Detroit, when has he not been willing to develop a young player who is worth it. I see Granger playing a ton and at the end of games.

Uh... Brezec. Harrsion.

We'd have a pretty good 1-2 punch at center now if it weren't for Carlisle.

At least, something far superior to Foster/ Pollard.

Clearly, Tinsley and Fred Jones have not grown as players since Rick came along. They've still got the same weaknesses as when Rick arrived.

All Rick has done with Granger is just "don't screw him up." Nothing more; nothing less.

Unclebuck
04-16-2006, 10:03 PM
Uh... Brezec. Harrsion.

We'd have a pretty good 1-2 punch at center now if it weren't for Carlisle.

At least, something far superior to Foster/ Pollard.

Clearly, Tinsley and Fred Jones have not grown as players since Rick came along. They've still got the same weaknesses as when Rick arrived.

All Rick has done with Granger is just "don't screw him up." Nothing more; nothing less.


No way primo deserved anytime with the players who were playing in front of him when he was a Pacer. I'd take Foster over Primo anyday. And there are times when you simply cannot play Harrison unless of course you want to lose.

Sorry, Primo and DH don't qualify in my book

ChicagoJ
04-16-2006, 10:06 PM
Brezec was better than Pollard that season, let alone now.

SoupIsGood
04-16-2006, 10:08 PM
And there are times when you simply cannot play Harrison unless of course you want to lose.


Yeah because we've been winning so much lately and all

Aw Heck
04-16-2006, 10:12 PM
Uh... Brezec. Harrsion.

We'd have a pretty good 1-2 punch at center now if it weren't for Carlisle.

At least, something far superior to Foster/ Pollard.

Clearly, Tinsley and Fred Jones have not grown as players since Rick came along. They've still got the same weaknesses as when Rick arrived.

All Rick has done with Granger is just "don't screw him up." Nothing more; nothing less.
The one season Carlisle had Brezec was when the team won 61 games. He was a non-factor. If I recall correctly, Foster, Pollard, and JO spent the most time at center and there was no real room for Brezec. The team was winning, there was no reason for player development. If Carlisle force-fed minutes to Brezec, everyone here would've been whining that they should be focused on winning now instead of developing players.

Besides, Brezec has never had minutes here. So if you're going to put the blame on someone's shoulders for not developing Brezec, you need to blame more people than Carlisle. Blame Isiah for not playing/developing him too and blame Larry/Donnie for trading for Pollard in the "trade." But I don't remember anyone clamoring for him to get playing time when he was here.

And I don't see how "clearly" Fred and Tinsley haven't improved. Tinsley's shooting has improved under Carlisle. Yes, Tinsley's shooting has been atrocious this season, but I blame that more on him constantly being injured more than anything. Last season Tinsley was playing at an All-Star level before he got hurt (a common theme).

And Fred never played under Isiah unless it was garbage time. His shooting has also improved under Carlisle.

I know it's easy and hip to blame anything and everything on Rick Carlisle right now, but come on.

brichard
04-16-2006, 10:14 PM
Brezec was better than Pollard that season, let alone now.


No he wasn't and no he isn't.

Primo is a better offensive player and I'll give you that. But Pollard is about as good of a post defensive/rebound presence you can get. His main issues have been health related (like your boy Tinsley,) but Primo is not in the same ballpark as a post defender.

I do think Fred Jones has gotten better as a player under Carlisle. His offensive prowess has blossomed in the last couple of years and he came in as a person who could score, but not shoot well... and he has developed a 3 pt. shot. It is an all to common retort, but injuries seem to have plagued him this year and reduced is effectiveness.

I will agree that Tinsley has not improved, but there are enough threads on that situation already. :cool:

Unclebuck
04-16-2006, 10:33 PM
Brezec was better than Pollard that season, let alone now.



Pollard played very little that 11 win season. He started 3 games, (I think the first 3 games of the season) He played in 61 games total, averaging 61 minutes per game, total of 678 minutes overall. I think Pollard was much better than Brezec that season, Brezec had never played in the NBA. Don't underestimate help defense and low post defense, and a veteran presense

To base the argument, "Carlisle refuses to play/develop young players" on Brezec I think is absurd. You have to look at the 61 win season, you cannot look at this season or last season, because it is not Rick's fault Primo is gone.

Bball
04-16-2006, 10:42 PM
Pollard played very little that 61 win season. He started 3 games, (I think the first 3 games of the season) He played in 61 games total, averaging 61 minutes per game,

I didn't realize there were so many overtime games that season nor did I realize what an ironman Pollard must've been that season.


BTW... the answer is...was... and always will be: We should've left Bender unprotected.

-Bball

ChicagoJ
04-16-2006, 10:45 PM
You can find plenty of threads in our archive where I wanted Brezec to get more development that season. Kegboy and I may have been the only two, but it was something greater than zero.

You can point to 61-wins and say, "there was no need for development". Or you can point to an ECF loss and say, "One more big man, especially on with a good shot that can spread the defense and get dirty" might've helped put that team over the top.

It was moot, however, because we were so concerned with winning 60+ regular season games during January and February that season that we didn't care about developing a guy that could help us in the playoffs. Clearly, thanks to Rick, and this short-sighted, myopic attitude from some of you, we didn't want to risk winning the ECFs if it meant fewer regular season wins.

Thank God we've got that "61 Win Season" banner hanging in The Fieldhouse to celebrate that tremendous accomplishment.

Unclebuck
04-16-2006, 10:49 PM
I didn't realize there were so many overtime games that season nor did I realize what an ironman Pollard must've been that season.


BTW... the answer is...was... and always will be: We should've left Bender unprotected.

-Bball

Typos, I hate them.


Well sure it is easy to say that yes bender should have been left unprotected. But I surre wasn't in favor of doing that two seasons ago.



On a more general note: I'm surprised there is so much love for Primo, he simply isn't that good.

pizza guy
04-16-2006, 11:01 PM
It makes me smile to see certain journalists get such a reaction from the folks on this board. Vescey draws this emotion, Kravitz another, and Bill Simmons something completely different.

That's why they are hired.

Each one of them has their own way of getting your attention and getting you to read what they've written. I just hope that when I become the next great sports journalist (which will be my major next year in college) I draw these same emotions -- because they'll keep me employed.

As for Carlisle, he needs canned. This whole team needs canned. Keep Danny and David and maybe Foster and Cro and everyone else can go. Starting with RC and not stopping until we've got a new water boy. I'm going to need a bigger bus in my avatar.

Aw Heck
04-16-2006, 11:17 PM
Hindsight is 20/20.

The rotations were working, the Pacers were winning. Before Detroit made the Sheed trade, the Pacers looked like a lock for the Finals. And Brezec wouldn't have been a difference maker in that series. That Pistons team was too good.

This is all moot anyway. I think Brezec was going to be left unprotected in favor of Bender regardless if he got playing time or not. In fact, him getting playing time would probably make him a lock for getting selected in the expansion draft.

But let's continue to make Carlisle the scapegoat for a myriad of problems over the past two seasons. That's easier.

pizza guy
04-16-2006, 11:26 PM
Hindsight is 20/20.

The rotations were working, the Pacers were winning. Before Detroit made the Sheed trade, the Pacers looked like a lock for the Finals. And Brezec wouldn't have been a difference maker in that series. That Pistons team was too good.

This is all moot anyway. I think Brezec was going to be left unprotected in favor of Bender regardless if he got playing time or not. In fact, him getting playing time would probably make him a lock for getting selected in the expansion draft.

But let's continue to make Carlisle the scapegoat for a myriad of problems over the past two seasons. That's easier.

Heck yes, aw heck!

ChicagoJ
04-17-2006, 12:05 AM
Hindsight is 20/20.
-snip-
But let's continue to make Carlisle the scapegoat for a myriad of problems over the past two seasons. That's easier.

I sense sarcasm.

Check the archive. That's been my #1 complaint about Rick since he got here - we've had/ got some excellent young talent and they're getting nowhere.

Of course, I never believed a team with Ron would amount to anything in the post-season anyway, so I've been ready for these young guys to get a chance to develop for years.

indygeezer
04-17-2006, 06:38 AM
You can find plenty of threads in our archive where I wanted Brezec to get more development that season. Kegboy and I may have been the only two, but it was something greater than zero.

You can point to 61-wins and say, "there was no need for development". Or you can point to an ECF loss and say, "One more big man, especially on with a good shot that can spread the defense and get dirty" might've helped put that team over the top.

It was moot, however, because we were so concerned with winning 60+ regular season games during January and February that season that we didn't care about developing a guy that could help us in the playoffs. Clearly, thanks to Rick, and this short-sighted, myopic attitude from some of you, we didn't want to risk winning the ECFs if it meant fewer regular season wins.

Thank God we've got that "61 Win Season" banner hanging in The Fieldhouse to celebrate that tremendous accomplishment.


AAAAACCCCCCCCCKKKKKKK!! WHY? Why do I NEVER get credit as one of his first and biggest fans??? I'm the one that nicknamed him Peanut Butter and Primrose Prozac was another of my nicknames for him. I don't hand out nicknames unless I really really like a guy. :cry:
I cried for playing time for the kid nearly from the start of his career...and yet...yet.(snif). I tellya I don't get no respect.

Gyron
04-17-2006, 01:31 PM
I get to see Primoz often living down here in Charlotte. While has a few decent games offensively, he really isn't that good. His defense just plain sucks.

The only reason he is starting for the Boobcats is because they simply don't have anyone to fill that position that is any better. I highly doubt he would start or even be getting any back up minutes on most decent teams in the NBA.

And this coming from me, a Peanut Butter(thanks Gezzer) fan and a person who has remained dedicated to having a slot for him on my Yahoo fantasy league(stupid, stupid, stupid!) for the last two years.

And yes he always does seem to have his better games against the Pacers.

Unclebuck
04-17-2006, 01:34 PM
I get to see Primoz often living down here in Charlotte. While has a few decent games offensively, he really isn't that good. His defense just plain sucks.

The only reason he is starting for the Boobcats is because they simply don't have anyone to fill that position that is any better. I highly doubt he would start or even be getting any back up minutes on most decent teams in the NBA.

And this coming from me, a Peanut Butter(thanks Gezzer) fan and a person who has remained dedicated to having a slot for him on my Yahoo fantasy league(stupid, stupid, stupid!) for the last two years.

And yes he always does seem to have his better games against the Pacers.


Thank you.

To hear Pacers fans discuss Primo you would have thought we let Shaq get away.

grace
04-17-2006, 02:33 PM
To hear Pacers fans discuss Primo you would have thought we let Shaq get away.

Just like some people swear up and down that Cabbage is the second coming. That's just the way some people are. :shrug:

Kegboy
04-17-2006, 08:22 PM
No he wasn't and no he isn't.

Yes, I'm sure, if only given the chance, Bernie would jump to trade Primoz for an S&T'd Pollard.

Make the call, Donnie!

:rollout:

Kegboy
04-17-2006, 08:25 PM
AAAAACCCCCCCCCKKKKKKK!! WHY? Why do I NEVER get credit as one of his first and biggest fans??? I'm the one that nicknamed him Peanut Butter and Primrose Prozac was another of my nicknames for him. I don't hand out nicknames unless I really really like a guy. :cry:
I cried for playing time for the kid nearly from the start of his career...and yet...yet.(snif). I tellya I don't get no respect.

Hey, I bumped the thread that proved you were a founding member of the "Peanut Butter Cookies".

:console:

Kegboy
04-17-2006, 08:34 PM
I get to see Primoz often living down here in Charlotte. While has a few decent games offensively, he really isn't that good. His defense just plain sucks.
His defense is significantly better than Rik's ever was.



The only reason he is starting for the Boobcats is because they simply don't have anyone to fill that position that is any better. I highly doubt he would start or even be getting any back up minutes on most decent teams in the NBA.
Bull. Not only did they originally plan to start Okafor at the 5, but they also have Melvin Ely, somebody half the league would love to have (including us.)



And yes he always does seem to have his better games against the Pacers.
against the league: 12.5ppg, 5.5rpg .521FG% .731FT%
against the Pacers: 13.3ppg, 5.0rpg .453FG% .714FT%
against Yao Ming: 15.0ppg, 8.5rpg .550FG% .800FT%
against Ben Wallace: 16.8ppg, 5.5rpg .592FG% .818FT%
against Brad Miller: 19.5ppg, 10.0rpg .682FG% .900FT%

:tongue:

vapacersfan
04-17-2006, 09:32 PM
PB is all right, but he would not have gut us over the hump vs Detroit.

Unless he would have been able to do what Cro did in hitting jumpers and spreading the floor for more then 3 games that series with the Pistons not adjusting to him...............but that is all a hypothetical game, and its a moot point at this point.