PDA

View Full Version : Mike Wells: Carlisle showed favoritism



Unclebuck
05-06-2006, 08:39 AM
Mike Wells makes some interesting points in this article. If several players thought he was harder on the rookies and Ron Artest than he was on Jax, J.O and Tinsley, and the players didn't think it was fair. My question is why Ron Artest. Does that mean that some players wanted Ron to stay.

One thing is so so clear, and this proved many theories wrong, wrong, wrong, Ron Artest was not the only source of the problems on this team. If he would have been, the chemistry would have improved at least a little bit when he was traded. Wouldn't it ?


http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20060506&Category=SPORTS04&ArtNo=605060473&SectionCat=&Template=printart


Recipe for success: Which ingredients stay?
After frustrating season, Pacers expect changes
By Mike Wells
mike.wells@indystar.com
May 6, 2006


Some players walked out of the locker room Thursday knowing they won't be back next season. Others wondered if they'll be traded this offseason. Almost all just wanted to get away and clear their heads from what was a disappointing and frustrating season.

The Indiana Pacers concluded their 41-41 season Thursday by losing to New Jersey 4-2 in the first round of the playoffs.

They know change is coming.

How much and who goes? Team president Larry Bird and CEO Donnie Walsh have those answers.

Here's an analysis of the roster:


Coach Rick Carlisle

Signed through 2006-07

Carlisle has won at least 50 games three times. His knowledge of the game has never been questioned, but players don't care for his micromanaging of the offense.

His ability to relate to the players is a concern. Bird said last month that Carlisle will be back next season, but several players griped about how he showed favoritism toward Jermaine O'Neal, Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley while being harder on players such as David Harrison, Danny Granger and Ron Artest.

Carlisle rarely disciplined Jackson when he complained to the officials, took bad shots or strolled back on defense, and he allowed his shooting guard to gripe at him, a sign of disrespect, while walking off the court when taken out of games.

One player said Carlisle took the fun out of the game with the way he ran the team this season.


Jermaine O'Neal

Signed through 2009-10

O'Neal's name will be mentioned in numerous trade scenarios this offseason. The Pacers say they don't intend to deal their All-Star power forward, but O'Neal has shown signs of wearing down mentally from what has happened the past two seasons.

A fresh start helped Artest and might not be bad for O'Neal, who continues to take most of the criticism for not leading the Pacers to a title.

Expect O'Neal to return unless the Pacers get a deal they can't refuse.


Peja Stojakovic

Unrestricted free agent

The Pacers want to re-sign Stojakovic to avoid coming away empty handed from the Artest trade in January. Both sides say they want to get a deal done.


Stephen Jackson

Signed through 2009-10

No player irks fans like Jackson. He played the most minutes, but his poor attitude at times grated on team officials and fans. Jackson's attitude likely won't change unless Carlisle demands it.

Jackson said after Game 6 that he won't be upset if he's not with the Pacers next season. That's certainly a possibility.


Anthony Johnson

Signed through 2007-08

An argument could be made that Johnson was the team's most reliable player. He went from the third point guard to playing the second-most minutes. He made a strong case that he should be the starting point guard next season by averaging 20 points on 52 percent shooting in the playoffs.


Jamaal Tinsley

Signed through 2010-11

Tinsley might have played his last game for the organization in Game 2 against New Jersey. He's talented but could never stay healthy long enough to make a maximum impact. He has played just 134 games in the past three regular seasons.

The Pacers have to hope a team is willing to take a chance on a talented but injury-prone player who is signed for five more seasons.


Fred Jones

Restricted free agent

Jones averaged 9.6 points and shot 42 percent. There were grumblings within the organization about Jones' laid-back attitude and work ethic, not a good sign for a player working for his next contract.

Jones' value will be helped by a weak free agent market for shooting guards. The Pacers will bring Jones back if they can get him cheap.


Sarunas Jasikevicius

Signed through 2007-08

Jasikevicius had a solid start to his NBA career, but then struggled and lost confidence. Jasikevicius rubbed some players the wrong way early by criticizing the team's performance.

Opponents exposed his defensive flaws and he shot just 39.6 percent. Coaches have to find a way to hide his defensive deficiencies to give him playing time.


Austin Croshere

Signed through 2006-07

The never-flashy Croshere was a steady contributor, but his name will be mentioned in trade rumors again this summer. He averaged 8.2 points and 5.3 rebounds while missing significant time after suffering two concussions within a month in January. He'll be a free agent at the end of next season.


Danny Granger

Signed through 2006-07 with a team option in 2007-08

Granger showed why he was projected as a top-10 pick last summer. Granger, the No. 17 pick, averaged 7.5 points and 4.9 rebounds while playing both forward positions.

He'll play on the team's Summer League squad in July and work on his dribbling throughout the offseason so that he can possibly play some shooting guard.


Jeff Foster

Signed through 2008-09
Foster played in just 63 games because of an assortment of injuries and missed the final two playoff games with a back injury. Foster, the team's best post defender and rebounder, is one of the few players on the roster whose effort you don't have to question. He averaged 9.1 rebounds.


David Harrison

Signed through 2006-07 with a team option in 2007-08

Constant foul trouble hampered his performance. His emotions often caused Carlisle to pull him. Harrison averaged nearly three fouls in 15 minutes a game.


Scot Pollard

Unrestricted free agent
Pollard was a situational starter, which frustrated him. He is a solid backup who does the little things that don't show up in the box score. Wants to return under the right circumstances.


Eddie Gill

Unrestricted free agent

The team's fourth point guard played 122 minutes this season. He is not expected back.

SoupIsGood
05-06-2006, 09:07 AM
Gill not expected to return?

I think Carlisle hindered David's progress and development even more than the foul trouble did.

Let's get a coaching staff that will help our young players realize their potential.

Drewtone
05-06-2006, 10:00 AM
[QUOTE=Unclebuck] My question is why Ron Artest. Does that mean that some players wanted Ron to stay.

One thing is so so clear, and this proved many theories wrong, wrong, wrong, Ron Artest was not the source of the problems on this team. If he would have been then the chemistry would have improved at least a little bit when he was traded. Wouldn't it ?
QUOTE]


UB, this is something that confused me in the May 4 Kravitz article, given the general assumption (or at least mine) that Jax was Ronnie's biggest supporter on the team:

>>"Ron Artest came out of it as a flawed hero, a cult figure who was generally beloved by Indiana fans. But Jackson, who was the first into the stands to defend Artest? He came out of it viewed as a bad guy with a vicious streak whose emotions were beyond control.
"Still, to this day, I'm seen that way," Jackson said. "I guess Ron's a superstar, one of the best players in the league, and they're not going to promote me like that. So I've got to take the fall for a lot of the stuff he created.
"People around me know I was just trying to be a good teammate. Before that night, I'd never been suspended for an incident, never been suspended for a fight, nothing. But they wanted to protect Ron's image so he could be used in commercials and (promoted) as one of the game's best players."
Jackson bent over at the waist and stared at the floor.
"I don't want to be in commercials, anyway,'' he said.<<

Sounds like some bitterness towards Ron and thinking to his comments early in the season about being option #2, one wonders what was going on with him & Ron, particularly if Jax is one of Coach's percieved soft spots. That kind of stuff could linger post-trade.

Jermaniac
05-06-2006, 10:51 AM
I'm telling you no one on this team wants to play for Rick, well AJ does but thats it. He is afraid of Jermaine and Stephen thats why he shows favoritism. I dont see how he shows favoritism at Jamaal Tinsley at all.

Tim
05-06-2006, 11:32 AM
I dont see how he shows favoritism at Jamaal Tinsley at all.



He threw Jamaal back as starter way too fast after coming back from major down time.

AJ should be our starter unless Jamaal can beat him out of it.

Aw Heck
05-06-2006, 11:33 AM
Danny Granger
.............

He'll play on the team's Summer League squad in July and work on his dribbling throughout the offseason so that he can possibly play some shooting guard.
I'm not trying to hijack this thread and turn it into something else, but did anyone else notice this? Are the Pacers thinking of starting both Peja and Granger?

To keep this on topic, I'm ready for Carlisle to be gone. He's a great coach and one of the best in the league, but he is not right for this team. His inability to get along with players irks me the most. And this favoritism thing definitely bothers me. I think it's time to say goodbye to Carlisle and his prevent offense. Get a coach in here that will develop the young guys and bring fun back to Indiana basketball.

bulletproof
05-06-2006, 11:38 AM
One thing is so so clear, and this proved many theories wrong, wrong, wrong, Ron Artest was not the only source of the problems on this team. If he would have been, the chemistry would have improved at least a little bit when he was traded. Wouldn't it?

No. Because the damage was already done. You have to remember, UB, the (already existing and well-documented) problems with Ron reached their apogee during the ECFs when he missed practices and traveled separate from the team. But despite that, the same players came back the next season and came out storming, playing with a sense of purpose and cohesiveness, like a team on a mission. Of course we all know what happened next. Just like that, it was gone. Poof. And the suspensions, the injuries, the high expectations never met, etc. ultimately took their toll. On the players, coaches, management and fans. All the king's horses and all the king's men... Make no mistake, Ron left quite a mark on this franchise.

Jermaniac
05-06-2006, 11:38 AM
He threw Jamaal back as starter way too fast after coming back from major down time.

AJ should be our starter unless Jamaal can beat him out of it.He also benched him and didnt play him for no reason at all during the 61 win season.

Unclebuck
05-06-2006, 12:18 PM
No. Because the damage was already done. You have to remember, UB, the (already existing and well-documented) problems with Ron reached their apogee during the ECFs when he missed practices and traveled separate from the team. But despite that, the same players came back the next season and came out storming, playing with a sense of purpose and cohesiveness, like a team on a mission. Of course we all know what happened next. Just like that, it was gone. Poof. And the suspensions, the injuries, the high expectations never met, etc. ultimately took their toll. On the players, coaches, management and fans. All the king's horses and all the king's men... Make no mistake, Ron left quite a mark on this franchise.

I was so facinated by the word apogee, I looked it up.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=apogee

1) a.The point in the orbit of the moon or of an artificial satellite most distant from the center of the earth.
b. The point in an orbit most distant from the body being orbited.
2) The farthest or highest point; the apex: “The golden age of American sail, which began with the fast clipper ships in 1848, reached its apogee in the Gold Rush years” (Los Angeles Times).






I understand and agree with your point, although your use of that word I'm not too sure about, but my question always comes back to, why couldn't this team pull themselves back up after Ron left then. I will never understand that, and the fact they didn't, couldn't or refused to, makes me wonder

Anthem
05-06-2006, 12:24 PM
I understand and agree with your point, although your use of that word I'm not too sure about, but my question always comes back to, why couldn't this team pull themselves back up after Ron left then.
They did. Briefly. And then Jermaine came back and Carlisle went back to slowball and smallball.

The underlying problems were always there, and they weren't about Ron. This team just wasn't assembled well.

bulletproof
05-06-2006, 12:39 PM
I understand and agree with your point, although your use of that word I'm not too sure about, but my question always comes back to, why couldn't this team pull themselves back up after Ron left then. I will never understand that, and the fact they didn't, couldn't or refused to, makes me wonder

Reached its height, highest point, its apex.

You mean after he was traded? Like I said, by then the damage was done. I never thought simply getting rid of Ron was going to undo everything he had done. The emotional toll from the brawl, the suspensions, the injuries, Reggie's departure, Ron's trade demand and departure was simply too much. As Pollard said, "If they were by themselves it wouldn't be a problem, but when they all hit there's nothing you can do about it."

Honestly, that's why the criticisms directed at Rick and certain players on the team baffle me. It seems as if everyone has forgotten what happened on 11/19 and have swept its effects on this franchise under the rug. Trust me, the wounds run deep.

Bball
05-06-2006, 01:24 PM
I understand and agree with your point, although your use of that word I'm not too sure about, but my question always comes back to, why couldn't this team pull themselves back up after Ron left then. I will never understand that, and the fact they didn't, couldn't or refused to, makes me wonder

Because Ron Artest was the engine of the team. He was the driving force. As Artest went, so went the Pacers. He was the closest thing to an on court leader that we had.... warts and all...

JO is not a difference maker regardless of salary. Artest was a difference maker, regardless of his eccentricities.

The reality is, making JO the focal point of the team likely did hold Artest back even. OTOH, the fact the Pacers never felt they could trust Artest and yet had tied 120,000,000.00 into JO made for an awkward situation. I'm sure TPTB wanted JO to be 'the man'.

When we lost Artest we lost out best player. I don't think it was even close. He was a difference maker.

[ducking for cover]
None of this means that Artest wouldn't have done something to blow the team up even if he was handed the reins. But considering where we are now, I'm not sure the gamble would've been all that bad of a gamble to take in hindsight. Maybe we could've traded JO for something last offseason so that we didn't have such a void once/if Artest was gone.

We had a golden opportunity to see what this team was like with and without JO in 04-05 (as the focal point and without Artest). It pretty much confirms what Sagarin's computer had told us a few years earlier (see my sig). [/ducking for cover]

I'm starting to believe as long as JO is here we're going to have that void and it's going to create one awkward situation after the next as other players are sucked into trying to fill it. But JO will always be an impediment in the way of someone truly reaching their potential in that regard. Or maybe it's the coach constantly putting JO into that position and maybe under a different regime he'd finally have the 'light bulb game' that we've all been waiting for and JO would fill the void, or step aside willingly so someone else can.

We probably don't need to read any more articles in the Star where JO proclaims himself the leader. Until I start seeing other players talking about JO being the leader I will consider the position "not filled".




-Bball

bulletproof
05-06-2006, 01:29 PM
[ducking for cover]
None of this means that Artest wouldn't have done something to blow the team up even if he was handed the reins. But considering where we are now, I'm not sure the gamble would've been all that bad of a gamble to take in hindsight. Maybe we could've traded JO for something last offseason so that we didn't have such a void once/if Artest was gone.[/ducking for cover]

This has to be the first case of 400/400 hindsight I've ever seen.


Here, try these on:
http://www.partypoopers.com/store/..%2Fstore%2FImages%2FnerdglassesL.jpg

Mourning
05-06-2006, 02:26 PM
This has to be the first case of 400/400 hindsight I've ever seen.


Here, try these on:
http://www.partypoopers.com/store/..%2Fstore%2FImages%2FnerdglassesL.jpg

:lol2:

Anthem
05-06-2006, 02:32 PM
This has to be the first case of 400/400 hindsight I've ever seen.
First off, 400/400 vision is pretty good. It's identical to 20/20.

But it's not hiindsight. Bball's been saying that for a long time.

Bball
05-06-2006, 02:48 PM
This has to be the first case of 400/400 hindsight I've ever seen.




I said it could be called hindsight. Of course TPTB have the opportunity to watch practice, talk with coaches, watch games from excellent vantage points, review tapes, talk to other basketball minds... oh... and review computer analysis as well....

I've always added the caveat we best hope we don't find out that Artest could be a good (enough) guy without JO and the main Artest problem was the two couldn't co-exist.

In any case... It's easy to claim that TPTB fully expected JO to be more of a factor, as did everyone else, and his failing to reach the heights expected of him is disappointing and unexpected. And then say- Only in hindsight can we see things differently, too bad no one said anything at the time... Well, except at least for that computer analysis that has proven to be dead on accurate....

But hey... you trade a popular player for someone, lessen your immediate chances at a return to the finals (or even a deep playoff run), and tell the world this guy is the new face of the franchise (thus guaranteeing he'll demand the max)... you don't want to hear he's not really a difference maker and you hitched your wagon to the wrong horse. Not when your history is to never admit a mistake or move on until you've thrown plenty of money at it.

EDIT: I should add that even if Artest will always 'go Artest' and so had to go no matter what, it doesn't elevate JO's game or position. They are two separate issuses.

-Bball

bulletproof
05-06-2006, 02:59 PM
First off, 400/400 vision is pretty good. It's identical to 20/20.

Okay, so I'm not an opthamologist...

If you are unable to read the big “E” on the chart at 20 feet away, even with corrective lenses, then you have 20/400 vision categorized by the World Health Organization (WHO) as blindness.

Nitpicker. :tongue:

bulletproof
05-06-2006, 03:15 PM
I've always added the caveat we best hope we don't find out that Artest could be a good (enough) guy without JO and the main Artest problem was the two couldn't co-exist.
You seriously think that what might've been Ron's main problem all along was that he and JO couldn't co-exist? Ron's problems didn't exist before he got here and JO brought them out? Jermaine was the reason he traveled alone and missed team practices during the ECFs? Jermaine was the reason Ron charged into the stands? What else can we blame Jermaine for? That he was the reason the cops had to be called out to Ron's home on several occasions because of domestic disputes?


In any case... It's easy to claim that TPTB fully expected JO to be more of a factor, as did everyone else, and his failing to reach the heights expected of him is disappointing and unexpected. And then say - Only in hindsight can we see things differently, too bad no one said anything at the time... Well, except at least for that computer analysis that has proven to be dead on accurate....
That "computer analysis" is garbage.


But hey... you trade a popular player for someone, lessen your immediate chances at a return to the finals (or even a deep playoff run), and tell the world this guy is the new face of the franchise (thus guaranteeing he'll demand the max)... you don't want to hear he's not really a difference maker and you hitched your wagon to the wrong horse. Not when your history is to never admit a mistake or move on until you've throw plenty of money at it.
Are you going there again? Give it a rest.

"Sacramento C Brad Miller had another awful game, scoring three points on 1-for-6 shooting."

The operative word being "another."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2006050523

That's pretty much the consensus. Yeah, he really "elevated" the Kings' chances of reaching the next round, much less the finals. But no reason to go there again. Results don't lie.

Bball
05-06-2006, 03:28 PM
You seriously think that what might've been Ron's main problem all along was that he and JO couldn't co-exist? Ron's problems didn't exist before he got here and JO brought them out? Jermaine was the reason he traveled alone and missed team practices during the ECFs? Jermaine was the reason Ron charged into the stands? What else can we blame Jermaine for? That he was the reason the cops had to be called out to Ron's home on several occasions because of domestic disputes?

You didn't read the last thing I said in my post which pretty much negates everything you just said here.

EDIT: Upon Further Review:
You must've forgotten the parts that were talked about in the original post (that you had replied to that started this exchange) because they also negated the need in those questions.


[ducking for cover]
None of this means that Artest wouldn't have done something to blow the team up even if he was handed the reins. But considering where we are now, I'm not sure the gamble would've been all that bad of a gamble to take in hindsight. Maybe we could've traded JO for something last offseason so that we didn't have such a void once/if Artest was gone.

We had a golden opportunity to see what this team was like with and without JO in 04-05 (as the focal point and without Artest). It pretty much confirms what Sagarin's computer had told us a few years earlier (see my sig). [/ducking for cover]




That "computer analysis" is garbage.

Obviously... that's why it bears out what we've been seeing. :confused:

I'll patiently wait for you to tell me why it's garbage. I'm sensing because it disagreed with what Donnie wanted to hear. That would be pretty weak tho, so I suppose you'll have a more substantial rebuttal.



Are you going there again? Give it a rest.

"Sacramento C Brad Miller had another awful game, scoring three points on 1-for-6 shooting."

The operative word being "another."

I was talking about Dale Davis.




http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2006050523

That's pretty much the consensus. Yeah, he really "elevated" the Kings' chances of reaching the next round, much less the finals. But no reason to go there again. Results don't lie.

You seem fixated on Brad Miller. :tongue:

-Bball

Anthem
05-06-2006, 03:31 PM
Nitpicker. :tongue:
ME? :eek:

ChicagoJ
05-06-2006, 06:42 PM
Ron was a bad influence. He certainly had a long list of problems prior to being teamed with JO.

Several other players saw what Ron apparently could get away with, and appears to have rubbed off on them.

This became a team full of bad attitudes. They finally took the cancer out of the body, but many other organs had been ruined along the way.

I don't see how UncleBuck doesn't get this.

This group, collectively and individually, is damaged goods. Because of Ron.

Will Galen
05-06-2006, 06:46 PM
Reggie Miller said, I quote; Ron is not the problem.

vapacersfan
05-06-2006, 06:56 PM
Reggie Miller said, I quote; Ron is not the problem.

I thought he said "Ron is not the only problem"

I always thought that statement said a lot, along with his "As Tinsley goes, so do the Pacers" comment.

Arcadian
05-06-2006, 07:39 PM
It is rediculous to suggest, edit or no edit, that Ron's problem was JO. It is just more mudslinging.

I agree to that the computer was BS. Does anyone really value a NBA money ball system that is about stats?

Anthem
05-06-2006, 08:32 PM
This group, collectively and individually, is damaged goods. Because of Ron.
The group was damaged goods anyway. We haven't had a real team since 2000.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10455

Peck
05-06-2006, 10:35 PM
The group was damaged goods anyway. We haven't had a real team since 2000.
http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10455

I have never agreed more with a statement in my entire life.

Anthem
05-06-2006, 11:11 PM
I have never agreed more with a statement in my entire life.
That makes today a red-letter day. I agree with you all the time; rarely do you agree with me.

:cheers:

8.9_seconds
05-07-2006, 01:41 AM
I have never agreed more with a statement in my entire life.


True.

Those were the sports days of my life....


Dale Davis
Rik Smits
Mark Jackson
Reggie Miller
Jalen Rose
Big Smooth
Chris Mullen
Travis Best
:drool:

I would name more, but my keyboard is wet.

bmac
05-07-2006, 11:46 PM
But hey... you trade a popular player for someone, lessen your immediate chances at a return to the finals (or even a deep playoff run), and tell the world this guy is the new face of the franchise (thus guaranteeing he'll demand the max)... you don't want to hear he's not really a difference maker and you hitched your wagon to the wrong horse. Not when your history is to never admit a mistake or move on until you've thrown plenty of money at it.


-Bball



Great post Bball. We didn't get here in just one season, it's been a "series of unfortunate events" that got us to this craptacular year.

Bball
05-07-2006, 11:56 PM
I thought he said "Ron is not the only problem"

I always thought that statement said a lot, along with his "As Tinsley goes, so do the Pacers" comment.


I believe the quote was closer to:
"Everyone thinks Ron Artest is the bad egg... Artest isn't the bad egg..."

-Bball