PDA

View Full Version : Does Bird Deserve Criticism For His Performance?: Conrad speaks out



vapacersfan
05-11-2006, 07:21 PM
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question.html

Rarely will I venture out of format to express my opinion on anything other than a response to a reader's question. But The Indianapolis Star published a column by Bob Kravitz in today's editions soundly criticizing Larry Bird for his performance as the Pacers' President of Basketball Operations. Because of the importance of the questions raised by his column, I felt compelled to examine them on a point-by-point basis.

The columnist criticized Bird for standing behind Ron Artest, then posing with him for the preseason cover of Sports Illustrated. Bird had two choices in the aftermath of 11/19. He could've done what Golden State did with Latrell Sprewell in 1998 and simply rid the franchise of Artest. Though the Warriors took a noble moral stance, they also gave away a valuable asset with nothing in return. They haven't been to the playoffs since. Bird showed franchise loyalty by standing behind him, in the process helping to rebuild Artest's image and therefore value. The S.I. article was extremely valuable in that regard. When Artest ultimately asked to be traded, Bird was able to acquire an extremely talented player, Peja Stojakovic, in return. Even if Stojakovic doesn't re-sign, the Pacers will have gained needed salary cap flexibility, or they could put together a sign-and-trade deal.

He criticized the decision to trade for Stojakovic, offering Corey Maggette and Bonzi Wells as more desirable alternatives. Maggette has a foot injury that not only cost him more than half of this season, but could very well cause problems in the future. Wells has talent but plenty of baggage. The last thing the franchise needed under the circumstances was to obtain a player that offered the potential for either health or behavior problems.

He criticized the trade of Al Harrington for Stephen Jackson. The fact of the matter was Harrington wanted out and the Pacers needed a shooting guard because of Reggie Miller's impending retirement. You can argue the merits of Jackson's time with the Pacers, but Harrington was, and still would be, an unhappy backup here because he plays the same position as Jermaine O'Neal.
The bottom line: the more you examine the facts, the better they reflect upon Bird's record.
He criticized the signing of Sarunas Jasikevicius. While Jasikevicius admittedly struggled his first season, it's normal for a European transplant, even a veteran, to struggle with his introduction to the NBA. Manu Ginobili averaged 7.6 points in his first season with the Spurs. Toni Kukoc averaged 10.4 his first season in Chicago. Drafted stars like Dirk Nowitzki and Stojakovic needed time to make the adjustment. It's far too early to judge the decision to sign Jasikevicius.


He singled out the firing of Isiah Thomas and the hiring of Rick Carlisle as Bird's only positive contributions. Don't underestimate the importance of that exchange. It had a profoundly positive effect on the franchise. But it was hardly Bird's only coup. What about the drafting of Danny Granger and David Harrison? Granger already looks like a future star, something you don't often get with the 17th pick. Harrison isn't there yet, but his future is bright and he was snagged with the last pick of the first round. Erazem Lorbek, last year's second-round pick, has been described as "the best European player of his age" by FIBA's website. The 21-year-old power forward is a year away, but his time is coming.

The bottom line: the more you examine the facts, the better they reflect upon Bird's record.

Shade
05-11-2006, 07:30 PM
I swear to God, I am NOT Conrad.

That's scary. :eek:

larry
05-11-2006, 07:48 PM
harrington is a natural small forward not a power forward. artest was our small forward. conrad spins things to make him look correct. if harrington is playing the 4 in atlanta thats because they are small. sure he can play the 4 just like artest but he is a 3 just like artest and he could EASILY start w/ jo. of course we have danny now.

rexnom
05-11-2006, 09:04 PM
harrington is a natural small forward not a power forward. artest was our small forward. conrad spins things to make him look correct. if harrington is playing the 4 in atlanta thats because they are small. sure he can play the 4 just like artest but he is a 3 just like artest and he could EASILY start w/ jo. of course we have danny now.

I think hindsight is 20/20. At the time we were getting a SG who could slash and shoot as well as defend (and was only expected to be a sixth man or third option) and unclogging the SF position. We told Al he wouldn't start. It seemed great at the time and for those first few games in 2004, we saw something that was really working.

cariocapacer
05-11-2006, 09:11 PM
On harrington/Jax both writers miss the real point. We gave Al away as we could have signed Jax for practically the same amount using the MLE exemption. Of course we didn't have the salary room to do that and avoid the luxury tax but that should have been the other criticism of Bird - his inability to create salary flexability to at least sign MLE guys.

Bball
05-11-2006, 09:36 PM
Teflon Don...
He couldn't stop Bird from doing all this stuff. He must've tried and tried yet Bird wouldn't listen and so Teflon was relegated to watching his empire crumble around him.

-Bball

One of these days I'll understand how Bird gets all the blame from some quarters yet it's questionable just how much control he's really had.

Peck
05-11-2006, 10:10 PM
I think Bob struck a nerve.

Young
05-11-2006, 10:15 PM
Another thing to remember about Jasikevicius is that as the season went on Carlise used him as a shooting guard...not good.

I agree with Conrad though.

Although I will say that the blame will start being pointed at Bird if he doesn't turn this thing around soon...he has to do something this summer trade wise.

Hicks
05-11-2006, 10:21 PM
I agree with Conrad more than I do with Kravitz on this.

Bball
05-11-2006, 10:36 PM
I agree with Conrad more than I do with Kravitz on this.

And I will agree with you...

Kravitz' position might prove to be right...eventually... but he jumped the gun in putting Bird in the crosshairs alone.

-Bball

Doug in CO
05-11-2006, 10:58 PM
I think Bob struck a nerve.

Yes he did - and Mr. Shade - that is his fracking job... maybe not to strike a nerve this deep, but to take a position, make a case, and be compelling.

Now I probably agree with Conrad as much as I do Kravitz - I am torn.

But let's remember this folks - Conrad is an employee of the Pacers - Bob is not. Take what he says with a huge grain of salt.

bulletproof
05-11-2006, 11:18 PM
I agree with Conrad more than I do with Kravitz on this.

It has a lot to do with the tone of the pieces. Bruner laid out his thoughts in a very pragmatic way. Whereas Kravitz is more provocative.

Doug in CO
05-11-2006, 11:20 PM
Whereas Kravitz is more provocative.

That - my friends - be his job.

Will Galen
05-11-2006, 11:23 PM
You can almost always criticize someones job performance, especially when the winner's and loser's are so clear cut like in the NBA. People even criticize their own job performance. For instance, Bird's already said he could/should have did a better job.

With there being 30 franchises after the same holy grail each year in the NBA there can only be one winner each year. Thus most are going to fail. Logic isn't good enough for some people though, some people are always going to criticize management. Especially sports columnists.

Now I believe people have a right to criticize, even when they criticize without knowledge. That some of their criticism's make them look . . . dumb by those more knowledgeable is beside the point. The fact is the people being criticized will dismiss some criticisms and take others to heart. Which is good.

For me I'm satisfied if management knows their basketball, and tries hard to do a good job. What more can you ask for? For them to get lucky? The fact is in the NBA, one move, pick, or trade, can make you good or bad for years, and sometimes it's just good fortune.

The truth is management of the Pacers has been excellent. Now there are posters on here that disagree, but the fact remains that the Pacers are recognized nationally as having good management.

As for Larry Bird, all I've really determined about him is that he is an excellent judge of basketball talent. However, other than picking players he seems to have hid behind Donny Walsh, so I have no real idea how good he will be once he takes over for Donny.

It's enough for me right now that Bird has admitted faults and already determined what he has to do to make the Pacers better.

Shade
05-11-2006, 11:25 PM
Yes he did - and Mr. Shade - that is his fracking job... maybe not to strike a nerve this deep, but to take a position, make a case, and be compelling.

Now I probably agree with Conrad as much as I do Kravitz - I am torn.

But let's remember this folks - Conrad is an employee of the Pacers - Bob is not. Take what he says with a huge grain of salt.

Can I have a job? I can be stubborn and uncompromising while only providing one side of a story as well.

brichard
05-11-2006, 11:29 PM
Of Course Bird deserves criticism for his performance. Until we win an NBA Championship, which last I checked he hasn't, then he will be open to criticism as all should be.

Attendance is down and the fans are booing the players. So, I am sure Larry Bird isn't whistling down the hallways happy with the way things are turning out. He is far too competitive for that.

If chemistry is bad and the players aren't being professional and the coach is losing the team... all things he freely admitted, then there is lots to improve on.

Overall I would give him a C- in his role thus far, and what he does this offseason will make a big impact on his grade next year. It isn't time to push him off a cliff, but he's a big boy and realizes he's got to improve the team next year.

Doug in CO
05-11-2006, 11:32 PM
Can I have a job? I can be stubborn and uncompromising while only providing one side of a story as well.

You really do not get what his job is - do you? That is clear.

He is not a reporter - he is to pick a side and make a case - no matter how flimsy you think his case is... it is NOT his job to present both sides... he is an OPINION COLUMNIST.

Arcadian
05-11-2006, 11:33 PM
I blame Kravitz for the Pacers decline. If only he told us sooner what a horrible state the franchise is in. Many, I think, are under estimate the media's role in building a winner. What they write matters--especially sports writers who only have a passing interest in the sport they are covering.

DisplacedKnick
05-11-2006, 11:39 PM
I find this a bit funny - a Pacers employee defends his boss and everyone jumps on his wagon. FWIW, I don't agree with a lot of what Kravitz wrote. I think the team's decline has much less to do with individual trades and more to do with a very, uh, disjointed atmosphere surrounding the franchise - and a lot of THAT is Bird's fault for supporting team anarchy.

Doug in CO
05-11-2006, 11:42 PM
I find it amusing how offended people get over an opinion in a crappy little paper than may put a little - a very little - heat on the establishment.

5,000 empty seats matters a helluva lot more than a few columns.

Shade
05-11-2006, 11:42 PM
You really do not get what his job is - do you? That is clear.

He is not a reporter - he is to pick a side and make a case - no matter how flimsy you think his case is... it is NOT his job to present both sides... he is an OPINION COLUMNIST.

But see, the thing is...he doesn't really HAVE an opinion. He just throws crap to the wall to rile people up. Why does he get paid for that, and how do I go about getting into that field? Hell, he's not even a good writer.

Doug in CO
05-11-2006, 11:43 PM
But see, the thing is...he doesn't really HAVE an opinion. He just throws crap to the wall to rile people up. Why does he get paid for that, and how do I go about getting into that field? Hell, he's not even a good writer.

Start with a journalism degree

Then go into marketing like 99% of us ;)

Hicks
05-11-2006, 11:48 PM
That - my friends - be his job.

Does seeing Doug/OH say "be his job" fustrate anyone else?

Shade
05-11-2006, 11:49 PM
Start with a journalism degree

Then go into marketing like 99% of us ;)

Ha...it all makes sense now. :uhoh:

The thing that annoys me about Kravitz is that everything he writes is always negative and condescending. He's never even-handed about anything, and a lot of the stuff he spouts is just uneducated and irresponsible. I guess Bob doesn't bother me as much as the fact that RATS actually pays this boob to write that garbage. And keep in mind, I agree with a lot of what he wrote this time. I just don't like the way he tries to go about making his "point."

Doug in CO
05-11-2006, 11:52 PM
Does seeing Doug/OH say "be his job" fustrate anyone else?

How about I say - that is his fracking job.

I did not feel real comfortable typing it myself to be honest.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 01:57 AM
That - my friends - be his job.

I don't have a problem with Kravitz. But that's because I take him for what he is - a provocateur. If he was a respected writer who had any real influence or if anyone within the organization actually took him seriously, then I might feel differently.

larry
05-12-2006, 02:03 AM
I think hindsight is 20/20. At the time we were getting a SG who could slash and shoot as well as defend (and was only expected to be a sixth man or third option) and unclogging the SF position. We told Al he wouldn't start. It seemed great at the time and for those first few games in 2004, we saw something that was really working.

Oh, I agree w/ you 100 percent. I always bust on Conrad, because he always makes up a bunch of BS to make his answers sound right. Instead of saying what he said he could of made the exact post you just made in regards to Al. That would have garnered more respect.

Indyfan
05-12-2006, 08:45 AM
I think Kravitz wrote that article because he saw Larry was throwing everyone but himself under the bus, and he wanted to point out that Larry could take more of the blame for this mess then he did.

A GM has to get lucky to be really successful, Look at Dumars for that. The trade for Ben wallace was not expected to work out so much in Detroits favor, getting Rasheed was an absolute steal and he has Ainge to thank for it. His draft picks have not all panned out but their success has overshadowed those failings. I'm not saying he isn't a very good GM, but he has also had some luck. Here we don't have any success to overshadow this teams troubles and the GMs have to take some responsibilty for how their moves have failed. Look at Bender, Jax, Tinsley, Brad and Artest. Were they bad moves at the time? Not all of them, but the end result now is not good and they have to take a little heat for it.

Bird has hung his coach out to dry with his comments, and Kravitz just pointed it out. I haven't heard anything which makes me think Bird won't fire Rick because they are friends as some think. I rather think he either doesn't have the approval from Simmons to have to pay 2 coaches next year or he doesn't see anyone available who is an upgrade as coach. He also may have some trouble getting a quality coach to come into this mess.

This business is brutal and everyone has to be able to take the heat when things go badly, that includes GM, coach and players.

sixthman
05-12-2006, 10:13 AM
A GM has to get lucky to be really successful, Look at Dumars for that.

Luck does have to play a part in winning an NBA championship.

Speaking of luck, skill played no part in Danny Granger becoming a Pacer. 99 percent of Pacers fans would have made the same choice as the Pacers did under the same circumstances.

BillS
05-12-2006, 10:22 AM
Does seeing Doug/OH say "be his job" fustrate anyone else?

Bobonics.

Will Galen
05-12-2006, 10:45 AM
Luck does have to play a part in winning an NBA championship.

Speaking of luck, skill played no part in Danny Granger becoming a Pacer. 99 percent of Pacers fans would have made the same choice as the Pacers did under the same circumstances.

Even with hindsite I doubt if you would get 99%.

A lot of Pacer fans wanted Gerald Green. I wanted Joey Graham until after the 14th pick and I realized with Green, Graham, and Granger all still on the board we were going to get a good player. After that I unclossed my toes, fingers, eyes, and legs and just waited to see who it would be.

Major Cold
05-12-2006, 11:05 AM
Kravitz sells papers. People need to realize that. But his articles might persuade more people than Brunner. I agree with Brunner on this particular article. Look when we went 61-21. We loved Bird. Did he make mistakes from then until now...yes. Is the franchise in doom...no. Austin's contract and Bender's injuries really hurt this team. Add that to Miller's departure and what do you expect? Win a title? As I look back it took two years for the spurs to win a title without the Admiral (JO is getting paid like Duncan his expectations are the same also). It took the Lakers a year to make the playoffs without Shaq. It is taking the Bulls a long time to recover from MJ and Pippen. Utah is just now getting to the threshold of the Playoffs. The Knicks...well they suck...The Celtics will need more than Pierce and company to regain the form of their rich history (imagine if Bias and Lewis lived). Houston is battling since Hakeem left even with Tracy and Yao. It took a Sheed trade to catapult the Pistons out of mediocrity after Thomas and Dumars left. In time we will have our chances. Those chances will be in the draft (name one big free agent to come to IN in the past 10 years). It will come. Is Bird the man to see that chance (Walsh will retire next year) when it comes? If he is not then we will miss our chance. Bird is here for awhile, unless he misses that chance

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 11:16 AM
Kravitz sells papers. People need to realize that. But his articles might persuade more people than Brunner. I agree with Brunner on this particular article. Look when we went 61-21. We loved Bird. Did he make mistakes from then until now...yes. Is the franchise in doom...no. Austin's contract and Bender's injuries really hurt this team. Add that to Miller's departure and what do you expect?

And there's that little incident that occurred on 11/19, but you're right, that really shouldn't factor into it. Or Ron's trade demand...

Major Cold
05-12-2006, 11:25 AM
When did that happen?!?!?!?!

Holy crap we are screwed


I was trying to honor the Pacers by not having Artest being the sole reason why we are declining. Yes he is the biggest factor...But not the only one.

brichard
05-12-2006, 11:41 AM
I think Kravitz wrote that article because he saw Larry was throwing everyone but himself under the bus, and he wanted to point out that Larry could take more of the blame for this mess then he did.

I don't think that is true. Larry is ultimately responsible for everybody underneath him, so by pointing out the issues of the team/coach, he is taking responsibility. But when the wheels are coming off, lots of folks share in the blame. Rick, Larry, Donnie, JO, etc... every body has to do a better job. Larry himself mentioned that he needed to be more hands on next year, and if that isn't a self-critique, then I guess I don't know what one is.

Larry wouldn't be the first Indiana legend (see Isiah Thomas) to get ripped by people in the media (Slick Leonard.)

ChicagoJ
05-12-2006, 11:57 AM
Larry certainly deserves criticism, so does Donnie.

Not sure they deserve as much criticism as Kravitz gave them... but in contract to Montieth's cuddly-soft treatment over the years, Kravitz's column was a significant change of pace.

Shade
05-12-2006, 12:05 PM
Larry certainly deserves criticism, so does Donnie.

Not sure they deserve as much criticism as Kravitz gave them... but in contract to Montieth's cuddly-soft treatment over the years, Kravitz's column was a significant change of pace.

...unless you've read Kravitz before.

His articles are all the same, just with a different target.

grace
05-12-2006, 12:11 PM
I think Kravitz wrote that article because he saw Larry was throwing everyone but himself under the bus, and he wanted to point out that Larry could take more of the blame for this mess then he did.

Has Larry ever in his professional life ever admitted that maybe he did something wrong or made a mistake by not doing something? Even Larry Brown admitted he screwed up in the season we don't discuss-part one.

grace
05-12-2006, 12:15 PM
...unless you've read Kravitz before.

His articles are all the same, just with a different target.

And that's why I rarely read them. When I do and on the rare chance that I actually agree with him it makes me wonder if maybe my opinion is wrong.

ChicagoJ
05-12-2006, 12:16 PM
...unless you've read Kravitz before.

His articles are all the same, just with a different target.

Has the team won a championship yet?

They deserve criticism.

Hell, the Pittsburgh papers have been extremely tough on guys like Bill Cowher and Mario LeMoo (its hockey, whatever) over the years. Look at the NYC press, as Doug points out.

Part of having a champion is having a media that challenges the team when it fails to win a championship.

Bball
05-12-2006, 12:43 PM
Larry certainly deserves criticism, so does Donnie.

Not sure they deserve as much criticism as Kravitz gave them... but in contract to Montieth's cuddly-soft treatment over the years, Kravitz's column was a significant change of pace.



Has the team won a championship yet?

They deserve criticism.

Hell, the Pittsburgh papers have been extremely tough on guys like Bill Cowher and Mario LeMoo (its hockey, whatever) over the years. Look at the NYC press, as Doug points out.

Part of having a champion is having a media that challenges the team when it fails to win a championship.

Ring the bell and give the man his prize!!!
I couldn't have said it better myself... (scary stuff, huh? ;) )

-Bball

Will Galen
05-12-2006, 01:15 PM
And that's why I rarely read them. When I do and on the rare chance that I actually agree with him it makes me wonder if maybe my opinion is wrong.

(laughing out loud!) Good thought!

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 01:40 PM
I suggest some of you start supporting another team because the odds aren't in Indiana's favor of winning a championship anytime soon when you consider that only 6 teams in the past 22 years have won an NBA championship and 10 in the last 30. Only 2 of those 6 teams aren't big-market, high-profile teams (San Antonio and Houston). It takes an incredible amount of luck for a smaller-market team to win it all. An incredible amount. And due to a lot of factors - free agency, etc. - luck doesn't favor these teams no matter how prepared they are. Also, I'd look at why 4 teams in the late 70s/early 80s outside of Los Angeles and Boston were able to win championships.

McClintic Sphere
05-12-2006, 01:58 PM
Scary how accurate Kravitz is becoming. Yes, Brunner does come across as the more reasonable, but he has no merit and is nothing more than a paid Management flack to me now. Look back over the last couple years at the pile of b.s. hype that Pacers.com has pushed out in the guise of journalism and realize it is nothing more than a marketing vehicle.
We removed all of our physicality as a team when Ron and Al departed, as well as our ability to put the screws to teams defensively. Whoever said Al was really a 3 was dead on and he attacked the basket as well, something we sorely lack now.

Bball
05-12-2006, 02:12 PM
I suggest some of you start supporting another team because the odds aren't in Indiana's favor of winning a championship anytime soon when you consider that only 6 teams in the past 22 years have won an NBA championship and 10 in the last 30. Only 2 of those 6 teams aren't big-market, high-profile teams (San Antonio and Houston). It takes an incredible amount of luck for a smaller-market team to win it all. An incredible amount. And due to a lot of factors - free agency, etc. - luck doesn't favor these teams no matter how prepared they are. Also, I'd look at why 4 teams in the late 70s/early 80s outside of Los Angeles and Boston were able to win championships.

...especially as long as that is the attitude that drives the franchise...

That is why it's time to get a new vision and direction for this franchise.

-Bball

zamboni77
05-12-2006, 02:14 PM
Ha...it all makes sense now. :uhoh:

The thing that annoys me about Kravitz is that everything he writes is always negative and condescending. He's never even-handed about anything, and a lot of the stuff he spouts is just uneducated and irresponsible. I guess Bob doesn't bother me as much as the fact that RATS actually pays this boob to write that garbage. And keep in mind, I agree with a lot of what he wrote this time. I just don't like the way he tries to go about making his "point."


Amen to that. Every Kravitz column seems to be a hack job on somebody. I don't think he likes puppies, apple pie or sunny days either.

Bball
05-12-2006, 02:26 PM
Everything that Kravitz writes is not negative. It's just that his positive columns don't generate the discussion that his negative ones do. He's one of the few that have challenged the status quo in Pacerland. Sometimes he's wrong... sometimes he right... and sometimes the truth hurts.

He does write about other topics besides the Pacers. ...It's not like the Pacers have given him lots of 'feel-good' material to write about lately tho.

And some people claim never to read him yet always seem to find their way into most of these threads with an opinion about his writing.

I'm glad we have Kravitz... we could do LOTS worse.

-Bball

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 02:55 PM
...especially as long as that is the attitude that drives the franchise...

That is why it's time to get a new vision and direction for this franchise.

-Bball

I think the GM job is beckoning you. C'mon, man, bring home the trophy for us. Quit talking and do something.

Oh, and how do you know that's the attitude that drives the franchise? You don't. Instead of being a one-note parrot, why don't you address my post. Dig a little deeper.

Hicks
05-12-2006, 03:11 PM
I think the GM job is beckoning you. C'mon, man, bring home the trophy for us. Quit talking and do something.

Oh, and how do you know that's the attitude that drives the franchise? You don't. Instead of being a one-note parrot, why don't you address my post. Dig a little deeper.

Remember comments like this (and another removed post) when you come to me about being baited.

Bball
05-12-2006, 03:45 PM
I think the GM job is beckoning you. C'mon, man, bring home the trophy for us. Quit talking and do something.

Oh, and how do you know that's the attitude that drives the franchise? You don't. Instead of being a one-note parrot, why don't you address my post. Dig a little deeper.

OK... I'll change it...

"...especially if that is the attitude that drives the franchise..."

Although I changed it for you, I think there has been plenty of comments over the years that would seem to back up my earlier statement. And I doubt you pulled your opinion out of thin air so can you honestly tell me that even though YOU believe what you said, management operates from a different point of view?


-Bball

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 04:00 PM
OK... I'll change it...

"...especially if that is the attitude that drives the franchise..."

Although I changed it for you, I think there has been plenty of comments over the years that would seem to back up my earlier statement. And I doubt you pulled your opinion out of thin air so can you honestly tell me that even though YOU believe what you said, management operates from a different point of view?

I don't know. But believe it or not, I'm very capable of formulating my own thoughts. I think all professional sports are stacked to some degree or another. It's naive to believe otherwise. It's a business. It just seems to me that the NBA is more stacked than the others. It's almost laughable and bears consideration.

Bball
05-12-2006, 04:07 PM
I don't know. But believe it or not, I'm very capable of formulating my own thoughts. I think all professional sports are stacked to some degree or another. It's naive to believe otherwise. It's a business. It just seems to me that the NBA is more stacked than the others. It's almost laughable and bears consideration.

That's what you were getting at? I missed it entirely...
I'd agree, all things being equal, if the league has a chance to do something and a big market will benefit, then that is the way they will decide in most cases.


-Bball

vapacersfan
05-12-2006, 04:36 PM
You really do not get what his job is - do you? That is clear.

He is not a reporter - he is to pick a side and make a case - no matter how flimsy you think his case is... it is NOT his job to present both sides... he is an OPINION COLUMNIST.

Its funny to me to see everytime Bob writes a article, you are the first to come and defend him no matter what it is.

You do realize that no matter what his job is, he is a reporter, and at the end of the day you are supposed to question reporters. He gets no free pass because he is willing to report the not so rosy stuff, and he esp. doesnt get a free pass because he takes hindsight and reports how he would do it so differently.

I have no problem with people questioning reporters who constantly present things in a positive light, and I see absolutly nothing wrong with people questioning a reporters who simply writes a article just to stir the pot - even if that "be his job"

Shade
05-12-2006, 05:42 PM
Has the team won a championship yet?

They deserve criticism.

Hell, the Pittsburgh papers have been extremely tough on guys like Bill Cowher and Mario LeMoo (its hockey, whatever) over the years. Look at the NYC press, as Doug points out.

Part of having a champion is having a media that challenges the team when it fails to win a championship.

I'm not saying they don't deserve some criticism. I'm just saying that using Kravitz's rantings as evidence support is really stretching. Kravitz doesn't deserve any applause because it's all a schtick with him. He's always critical of everybody.

DisplacedKnick
05-12-2006, 05:50 PM
Its funny to me to see everytime Bob writes a article, you are the first to come and defend him no matter what it is.

You do realize that no matter what his job is, he is a reporter,

Nope.


and at the end of the day you are supposed to question reporters.

Nope - he isn't a reporter.


He gets no free pass because he is willing to report the not so rosy stuff, and he esp. doesnt get a free pass because he takes hindsight and reports how he would do it so differently.

I have no problem with people questioning reporters who constantly present things in a positive light, and I see absolutly nothing wrong with people questioning a reporters who simply writes a article just to stir the pot - even if that "be his job"

Kravitz doesn't report. He's a columnist who writes his opinions. Are Ann Landers and Dear Abby reporters?

Doesn't mean you can't disagree with him - in fact, any good columnist should have a goal of p!ssing substantial numbers of people off on a regular basis - it's one way of getting read.

But he's not a reporter - someone who reports. He writes his opinion which is no more valid than yours or mine except he gets paid and thousands of people read it.

Bball
05-12-2006, 06:37 PM
He writes his opinion which is no more valid than yours or mine except he gets paid and thousands of people read it and bytch about it.

fixed...

:cool:

:zip:

-Bball

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:23 PM
I suggest some of you start supporting another team because the odds aren't in Indiana's favor of winning a championship anytime soon when you consider that only 6 teams in the past 22 years have won an NBA championship and 10 in the last 30. Only 2 of those 6 teams aren't big-market, high-profile teams (San Antonio and Houston). It takes an incredible amount of luck for a smaller-market team to win it all. An incredible amount. And due to a lot of factors - free agency, etc. - luck doesn't favor these teams no matter how prepared they are. Also, I'd look at why 4 teams in the late 70s/early 80s outside of Los Angeles and Boston were able to win championships.

Settle for mediocrity - or realize that it is damn hard and work towards it?

It is scary to me that your thoughts are held by some in TPTB

And depresseing as hell

I have been following the Pacers all my life - thanks for the advice, but I'll stick with it

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:26 PM
Its funny to me to see everytime Bob writes a article, you are the first to come and defend him no matter what it is.

You do realize that no matter what his job is, he is a reporter, and at the end of the day you are supposed to question reporters. He gets no free pass because he is willing to report the not so rosy stuff, and he esp. doesnt get a free pass because he takes hindsight and reports how he would do it so differently.

I have no problem with people questioning reporters who constantly present things in a positive light, and I see absolutly nothing wrong with people questioning a reporters who simply writes a article just to stir the pot - even if that "be his job"

You don't know the difference either

Reporter

Editorial Columnist

Different jobs

Opinions are just that - and papers need people to write them in order to remain interesting

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:28 PM
I don't know. But believe it or not, I'm very capable of formulating my own thoughts. I think all professional sports are stacked to some degree or another. It's naive to believe otherwise. It's a business. It just seems to me that the NBA is more stacked than the others. It's almost laughable and bears consideration.

The NBA is stacked more than others?

have you ever heard of baseball?

Wow.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:34 PM
Nope.



Nope - he isn't a reporter.



Kravitz doesn't report. He's a columnist who writes his opinions. Are Ann Landers and Dear Abby reporters?

Doesn't mean you can't disagree with him - in fact, any good columnist should have a goal of p!ssing substantial numbers of people off on a regular basis - it's one way of getting read.

But he's not a reporter - someone who reports. He writes his opinion which is no more valid than yours or mine except he gets paid and thousands of people read it.

Spoken like a man from the NYC metro area

:applaud:

Listen - their are plenty of topics I do not know about (opening myself up for a shot here, but what the hell)... what I do know is the media, reporting, and opinion columnists. I studied it, received an award from the AP for my own reporting, and know what the difference is... Shade and VA continue to show their lack of either acceptance or understanding as to what the man's job is.

Bob pisses the hell out of you - guess what, that is a part of his job.

Just like it is part of his job to challenge the local sports scene.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 08:39 PM
Settle for mediocrity - or realize that it is damn hard and work towards it?
Who's settling for mediocrity?


It is scary to me that your thoughts are held by some in TPTB
How do you know my thoughts are held by TPTB? How do you make that leap?

Are Hicks' thoughts below an indication that he's willing to settle for mediocrity, or is he simply casting a wider net in his thinking and trying to look at the big picture instead of resorting to the small-mindedness that comes with pointing a finger at one person?


I think the truth we may all have to face is that in Indiana, you just don't have a lot of options as a GM. Sure, you can always make moves, but are they long-term a gain or not?

Think about it. In Indiana we know that:

1) It's hard to impossible to get a huge free agent (read: All-Star or better) to sign here from a different city they're leaving.

2) The fan base is fickle. They know what they want, they know what they don't want, and if you try to blow a team up or even significantly rebuild it, you risk lowering attendance, and this franchise depends heavily on local fan support. Heavily. That's a kick in the gut financially to do this for them.

3) Due to #'s 1 and 2, trades have to be made with extreme caution. In a position like this, you tend to feel lucky to even have valuable assets at all. You either drafted them or traded a current good player for a future good player who blossomed, most likely. So even when you see changes really need to be made, you're not about to just give them away to clean up the chemistry. You have to wait and hope that either a) The right deal comes along where you don't take a hit (or much of one) talent-wise or b) The player cleans up his act enough to be tolerated.

Our best method of getting quality is through the draft, which is also extremely difficult when you can't afford to have a basement season to get a high lottery pick. You have to pick from #16-30 every year, and hope you find a diamond that drops (like Granger probably is).

Given all of that, it's extremely difficult to make a lot of change with this team without the entire house of cards collapsing. After reading Pacers Digest for years now, I see a lot of long-term fans who don't keep this in mind often enough, and choose to instead scream at the players, coaches, and/or managers they like the least and/or flat out despise. Wishing won't make it so. The reality is, not a lot can be done without the patience we all get sick and tired of seeing.

Give it time. I don't mean another year. Save your anger for October. Then you will truly know if Bird is doing what you hate or like. Screaming about it in May over assumptions and angry bias won't get you anywhere healthy.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:46 PM
Who's settling for mediocrity?


How do you know my thoughts are held by TPTB? How do you make that leap?

Are Hicks' thoughts below an indication that he's willing to settle for mediocrity, or is he simply casting a wider net in his thinking and trying to look at the big picture instead of resorting to the small-mindedness that comes with pointing a finger at one person?

I don't think Hicks is settling - I think some in TPTB settle for being competitive - and never make the Rasheed Wallace move

As far as how I make the leap - your post just sounded to me an awful like what I have perceived to be some in TPTB's attitide.

Your defeatist attitude is depressing.

I know - it's an opinion and I should probably stick to being a reporter.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 08:48 PM
The NBA is stacked more than others?

have you ever heard of baseball?

Wow.

Have you? 14 different teams in the last 20 years have won the World Series, 19 in the last 30; compared to 6 teams in the past 20 for the NBA, 10 in the last 30.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 08:50 PM
I don't think Hicks is settling - I think some in TPTB settle for being competitive - and never make the Rasheed Wallace move

As far as how I make the leap - your post just sounded to me an awful like what I have perceived to be some in TPTB's attitide.

Your defeatist attitude is depressing.

I know - it's an opinion and I should probably stick to being a reporter.

My thinking is defeatist, but Hicks' isn't? Okay.

Your perception is wrong. I don't think you get to where Bird and Walsh are by settling for mediocrity.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:51 PM
Have you? 14 different teams in the last 20 years have won the World Series, 19 in the last 30; compared to 6 teams in the past 20 for the NBA, 10 in the last 30.

Baseball is a very different game post 1994

This is ridiculous - every year you could take 8 of the 30 teams at the beginning of the year and practically guarantee one wins it all. Why? TRUE revenue disparity. Significant roster finances. baseball's system is the worst - because so many teams have no chance under this system.

Shade
05-12-2006, 08:52 PM
Spoken like a man from the NYC metro area

:applaud:

Listen - their are plenty of topics I do not know about (opening myself up for a shot here, but what the hell)... what I do know is the media, reporting, and opinion columnists. I studied it, received an award from the AP for my own reporting, and know what the difference is... Shade and VA continue to show their lack of either acceptance or understanding as to what the man's job is.

Bob pisses the hell out of you - guess what, that is a part of his job.

Just like it is part of his job to challenge the local sports scene.

I'm well aware of what Kravitz's job entails. What I'm saying is, Bobbo isn't giving an opinion, unless he's the most negative man on earth. All people have opinions, both positive and negative. Somehow, however, Kravitz manages to only ever take shots at people while sitting on his pedestal. He's a one-note wonder, and it's gotten stale.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:53 PM
My thinking is defeatist, but Hicks' isn't? Okay.

Your perception is wrong. I don't think you get to where Bird and Walsh are by settling for mediocrity.

You told us to go pick another team because the Pacers will never win a championship... or that the chances were slim to none.

Saying something is difficult is different than saying it is not going to happen.

Maybe I can be a Cavs fan - but wait - I am a fan, really being a fan means you can't change teams.

Shade
05-12-2006, 08:56 PM
I don't think Hicks is settling - I think some in TPTB settle for being competitive - and never make the Rasheed Wallace move

As far as how I make the leap - your post just sounded to me an awful like what I have perceived to be some in TPTB's attitide.

Your defeatist attitude is depressing.

I know - it's an opinion and I should probably stick to being a reporter.

Um...the Pacers did make their own "Rasheed Wallace move." Do the words "Ron Artest" ring a bell?

The difference is, our risk actually blew up in our faces. Detroit was not so unfortunate. That's why it's called a "risk."

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:56 PM
I'm well aware of what Kravitz's job entails. What I'm saying is, Bobbo isn't giving an opinion, unless he's the most negative man on earth. All people have opinions, both positive and negative. Somehow, however, Kravitz manages to only ever take shots at people while sitting on his pedestal. He's a one-note wonder, and it's gotten stale.

Perhaps is the local sports teams weren't so damn depressing over the past several years we would have some positive columns.

You're right - he should have written the - It's Okay Peyton, Better Luck Next Year Column - we still love you even though you shat on your best chance to go to a SB

OR how about - Fred Jones almost hit another game winning shot - he leads the league in almosts... I know they never go in... but gol' darnit... he is trying

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 08:57 PM
Um...the Pacers did make their own "Rasheed Wallace move." Do the words "Ron Artest" ring a bell?

The difference is, our risk actually blew up in our faces. Detroit was not so unfortunate. That's why it's called a "risk."

A trade - a trade to put you over the top - when you are standing still you are getting passed - even when you are winning 61 games

Is that more specific?

Shade
05-12-2006, 09:03 PM
Perhaps is the local sports teams weren't so damn depressing over the past several years we would have some positive columns.

You're right - he should have written the - It's Okay Peyton, Better Luck Next Year Column - we still love you even though you shat on your best chance to go to a SB

OR how about - Fred Jones almost hit another game winning shot - he leads the league in almosts... I know they never go in... but gol' darnit... he is trying

You're missing the point. Kravitz has never met a person he hasn't decided to be critical about. His only claim to fame is to take a dump on everyone he encounters. If it isn't Peyton Manning, or Ron Artest, it's Larry Bird or Jermaine O'Neal. All Kravitz basically does is take the same article and insert the name of his "scapegoat of the week."

Kravitz doesn't anger me at all. I just get tired of his predictable garbage-spewing. Fault Bob for that or fault RATS for continuing to give him a paycheck for it. Either way, it would be nice to have someone with a more rational "opinion" in Bobby's place. Everything Kravitz writes is backed up with either hasty, irrational conclusions or with the fortune of hindsight.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 09:05 PM
Ideally, the STAR would have 2 columnists with differing opinions

Shade
05-12-2006, 09:08 PM
A trade - a trade to put you over the top - when you are standing still you are getting passed - even when you are winning 61 games

Is that more specific?

Why would we go out of our way to make a trade when we are arguably the best team in the NBA?

Remember, Sheed fell into Detroit's laps for a bag of chips while we were busy beating them regularly and acquring home-court advantage. Did you really expect TPTB to be able to put something together to counter that move so quickly? Hell, it was debatable at the time if the acquisiton of a guy with such a troubled history wouldn't end up crushing their chemistry in the process.

Detroit got lucky. There's nobody to blame for that. But if you want to blame some of TPTB's moves after that, then by all means, go for it.

Fool
05-12-2006, 09:10 PM
While I agree that the Pistons got lucky, I wouldn't characterize a 3 team trade as "falling into their lap". I imagine (and have read) that Dumars had to work hard for that trade and saved it from falling about more than once.

Shade
05-12-2006, 09:11 PM
Ideally, the STAR would have 2 columnists with differing opinions

Yeah, I mentioned earlier that that would be ideal. I think Kravitz would be a little less maniacal if he actually had somebody debating him publically. It's much easier to be a smug columnist when nobody is stepping up to debate your claims and point out the faults in your arguments.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 09:16 PM
Why would we go out of our way to make a trade when we are arguably the best team in the NBA?

Remember, Sheed fell into Detroit's laps for a bag of chips while we were busy beating them regularly and acquring home-court advantage. Did you really expect TPTB to be able to put something together to counter that move so quickly? Hell, it was debatable at the time if the acquisiton of a guy with such a troubled history wouldn't end up crushing their chemistry in the process.

Detroit got lucky. There's nobody to blame for that. But if you want to blame some of TPTB's moves after that, then by all means, go for it.

There were some of us who wanted the Pacers to work hard to get Sheed at that time... if just to block the Pistons... sort of like them signing Dale (on a much lesser scale - sorry Peck)

Ever notice how Detroit makes moves to counter us? Even to this day. That is smart.

Shade
05-12-2006, 09:19 PM
There were some of us who wanted the Pacers to work hard to get Sheed at that time... if just to block the Pistons... sort of like them signing Dale (on a much lesser scale - sorry Peck)

Ever notice how Detroit makes moves to counter us? Even to this day. That is smart.

What could we have realistically hoped to offer at that time for Sheed without disrupting our chemistry?

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 09:22 PM
Detroit did not give up anything

and right now I am watching the Mets (one of the 8 teams that has a chance to win it this year) so I am just too lazy to look into it to report my opinion

Will Galen
05-12-2006, 10:03 PM
And some people claim never to read him yet always seem to find their way into most of these threads with an opinion about his writing.

I'm glad we have Kravitz... we could do LOTS worse.

-Bball

If you're taking about me not reading him, I explained that. (Look it up) I could decide to stop reading him again.

As for doing a lot worse than Kravitz . . .

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 10:38 PM
Baseball is a very different game post 1994

This is ridiculous - every year you could take 8 of the 30 teams at the beginning of the year and practically guarantee one wins it all. Why? TRUE revenue disparity. Significant roster finances. baseball's system is the worst - because so many teams have no chance under this system.

The numbers don't lie. There's obviously a greater chance for a different MLB team to win it all in any given year than in the NBA.

ChicagoJ
05-12-2006, 10:42 PM
The numbers don't lie. There's obviously a greater chance for a different MLB team to win it all in any given year than in the NBA.

Pre-1994, yes.

Since that CBA? No - its become a caste system.

There are only handful of contenders and they've all got deep pockets.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 10:47 PM
Pre-1994, yes.

Since that CBA? No - its become a caste system.

There are only handful of contenders and they've all got deep pockets.

7 different MLB teams have won the World Series since 1994. Seven.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 10:53 PM
The numbers don't lie. There's obviously a greater chance for a different MLB team to win it all in any given year than in the NBA.


Lies... damn lies and statistics

It must be quite a burden to always be so right

In this case you are most likely alone (as Homer sayd - everyone is stupid but me). Try and find ONE person that would agree with you that baseball is a more fair system for small markets than the NBA. Just one.

MLB is a biased system than creates 2 or even 3 tiers of teams... small market matters MUCH more in baseball. The closest thing baseball has to a small market winning the series since 94 is Arizona (Phoenix).

Now if you want to use 20 or 30 years for your argument, knock yourself out.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 11:00 PM
7 different MLB teams have won the World Series since 1994. Seven.

You are not seeing my point (shocking)

There is one tier of teams that the WS chaamp will come from. These are:

Boston
NYY
Anaheim
CWS
Philly
NYM
Cards
Houston

I guarantee the World Series Champ will come from one of these 8 teams. And I would bet that at least 5 or 6 of these teams will be the 8 in the plkayoffs (and I did not even pick from one division).

Now there's a healthy system.

Funny - I never hear any experts saying how the NBA system is unfair - that is all you ever hear about baseball... but you are right Homer, everyone is stupid but you.

Tell you what - I take these 8, you take the other 22... loser bans himself.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 11:02 PM
Lies... damn lies and statistics

It must be quite a burden to always be so right

In this case you are most likely alone (as Homer sayd - everyone is stupid but me). Try and find ONE person that would agree with you that baseball is a more fair system for small markets than the NBA. Just one.

MLB is a biased system than creates 2 or even 3 tiers of teams... small market matters MUCH more in baseball. The closest thing baseball has to a small market winning the series since 94 is Arizona (Phoenix).

Now if you want to use 20 or 30 years for your argument, knock yourself out.

So you're saying there's a better chance that a team will come out of nowhere and win it all in the NBA versus MLB.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 11:05 PM
You are not seeing my point (shocking)

...but you are right Homer, everyone is stupid but you.

Ever hear the saying "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause."

I thought we were having a discussion, but you seem to want to throw darts.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 11:11 PM
Ever hear the saying "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause."

I thought we were having a discussion, but you seem to want to throw darts.

Wow

You really are not very self aware are you

You don't discuss anything with anyone - your tone is argumentative, condescending... and exhausting.

And when you push people to the point where they have to use strong words to TRY and get something through your bulletproof, thick head... you respond with this

UNCLE - I need some sleep

I really have wasted too much time on trying to talk some sense in to you - it is a futile effort

Shade
05-12-2006, 11:16 PM
Ever hear the saying "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause."

I thought we were having a discussion, but you seem to want to throw darts.

I agree that the Homer comment is towing the line.

Gloves above the waist. Let's keep it clean.

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 11:19 PM
I agree that the Homer comment is towing the line.

Gloves above the waist. Let's keep it clean.

Now I can't quote Homer Simpson?

Please list all cartoon characters that are off limits.

I was trying to be FUNNY in making a point that Mr. BP thinks everyone is stupid but him.

Hard to argue that.

Plus Homer is just so funny!

Shade
05-12-2006, 11:28 PM
Now I can't quote Homer Simpson?

Please list all cartoon characters that are off limits.

I was trying to be FUNNY in making a point that Mr. BP thinks everyone is stupid but him.

Hard to argue that.

Plus Homer is just so funny!

Calling someone a "Homer" is generally considered an insult. At first you quoted Homer, which is fine, but then you actually referred to bp as "Homer," which I felt was a little over the line.

And Stewie Griffin is off-limits. :tongue: ;)

Doug in CO
05-12-2006, 11:29 PM
Calling someone a "Homer" is generally considered an insult. At first you quoted Homer, which is fine, but then you actually referred to bp as "Homer," which I felt was a little over the line.

And Stewie Griffin is off-limits. :tongue: ;)

I did? That is strange because bp is not funny at all.

But Homer... damn that fat man makes me laugh.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 11:54 PM
Wow

You really are not very self aware are you

You don't discuss anything with anyone - your tone is argumentative, condescending... and exhausting.

And when you push people to the point where they have to use strong words to TRY and get something through your bulletproof, thick head... you respond with this

UNCLE - I need some sleep

I really have wasted too much time on trying to talk some sense in to you - it is a futile effort

All you did was say you were right and I was wrong without supporting it with any facts or reasons why and then proceeded to stamp your feet like a child.

I'm not self-aware? You really have no clue.

bulletproof
05-12-2006, 11:59 PM
That is strange because bp is not funny at all.
I'm a funny guy.

vapacersfan
05-13-2006, 08:59 AM
Nope.



Nope - he isn't a reporter.



Kravitz doesn't report. He's a columnist who writes his opinions. Are Ann Landers and Dear Abby reporters?

Doesn't mean you can't disagree with him - in fact, any good columnist should have a goal of p!ssing substantial numbers of people off on a regular basis - it's one way of getting read.

But he's not a reporter - someone who reports. He writes his opinion which is no more valid than yours or mine except he gets paid and thousands of people read it.

It's a matter of technicality, but you are right, he is not a reporter.


My point still stands, he should not be taken as gospel, the way some people here do and jump down other throats when anyone questions what he says.

vapacersfan
05-13-2006, 09:01 AM
You don't know the difference either

Reporter

Editorial Columnist

Different jobs

Opinions are just that - and papers need people to write them in order to remain interesting

I dont know the difference either, what???.......

I already addressed this in my above post.

vapacersfan
05-13-2006, 09:05 AM
Spoken like a man from the NYC metro area

:applaud:

Listen - their are plenty of topics I do not know about (opening myself up for a shot here, but what the hell)... what I do know is the media, reporting, and opinion columnists. I studied it, received an award from the AP for my own reporting, and know what the difference is... Shade and VA continue to show their lack of either acceptance or understanding as to what the man's job is.

Bob pisses the hell out of you - guess what, that is a part of his job.

Just like it is part of his job to challenge the local sports scene.

Once again you miss the point.

Like I said above, I realize there is a difference.

Sorry, I have never take a journalism class, although I have written a few articles for some newspapers and papers around here.

But your right, I dont get what his job is. I dont know anything. How could I ever compare to the genious that is Doub in Ohio....

Give me a break. You obviously missed my point to start off with, maybe if you would take a break from patting yourself on the back and bothered sitting back and looking at my point you would realize I have no problem with what he does, I even welcome it. I just laugh at people who defend him like his work is there work, and like he can do no wrong.

bulletproof
05-13-2006, 09:35 AM
Listen - their are plenty of topics I do not know about (opening myself up for a shot here, but what the hell)... what I do know is the media, reporting, and opinion columnists. I studied it, received an award from the AP for my own reporting, and know what the difference is... Shade and VA continue to show their lack of either acceptance or understanding as to what the man's job is.

Let me guess, the AP award wasn't for grammar. ;)

Doug in CO
05-13-2006, 10:03 AM
Let me guess, the AP award wasn't for grammar. ;)

Give it a rest - I am sorry if my typo fustrated you

I have grown exhausted with you and pretty much should put both you and VA on ignore

And VA - Kravitz has had plenty of asinine columns - but in my opinion some people just can't stand anything he writes - so I defended the guy... maybe that will get me banned from the digest (if it was up to you)

You guys can continue trashing me, my words, whatever - but for this thread, I am just done

bulletproof
05-13-2006, 10:09 AM
Give it a rest - I am sorry if my typo fustrated you

I have grown exhausted with you and pretty much should put both you and VA on ignore

And VA - Kravitz has had plenty of asinine columns - but in my opinion some people just can't stand anything he writes - so I defended the guy... maybe that will get me banned from the digest (if it was up to you)

You guys can continue trashing me, my words, whatever - but for this thread, I am just done

And you think I don't have a sense of humor. Sheesh. I thought the winking smiley was supposed to indicate that someone is kidding. My apologies for the misunderstanding.

ChicagoJ
05-13-2006, 10:15 AM
Once again you miss the point.

Like I said above, I realize there is a difference.

Sorry, I have never take a journalism class, although I have written a few articles for some newspapers and papers around here.

But your right, I dont get what his job is. I dont know anything. How could I ever compare to the genious that is Doub in Ohio....

Give me a break. You obviously missed my point to start off with, maybe if you would take a break from patting yourself on the back and bothered sitting back and looking at my point you would realize I have no problem with what he does, I even welcome it. I just laugh at people who defend him like his work is there work, and like he can do no wrong.

VA, you're not helping your cause here. And if this "you're right, i'm so stupid" is another attempt at sarcasm you're getting worse and worse at explaining yourself. You were wrong in the first place; maybe an "oops" would be a better idea?

An article, and an opinion column, are entirely different.

Bob's job is to have an opinion.

Discredit wikipedia all you want, but this definition is pretty good. Please come to terms with it without all the drama.


Columnist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


A columnist is a journalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalist) who produces a specific form of writing for publication called a "column". Columns appear in newspapers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper), magazines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine) and the Internet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet). Some Internet columns are called blogs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weblog) or Weblogs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weblog).
What differentiates a column from other forms of journalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism) is that it meets each of the following criteria:

It is a regular feature in a publication
It is personality-driven by the author
It explicitly contains an opinion or point of view
</H1>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columnist

That's exactly what Bob does.

bulletproof
05-13-2006, 10:17 AM
Discredit wikipedia all you want...

I like wikipedia. :blush: Am I not supposed to?

ChicagoJ
05-13-2006, 10:26 AM
And you think I don't have a sense of humor. Sheesh. I thought the winking smiley was supposed to indicate that someone is kidding. My apologies for the misunderstanding.

Can I recommend that everyone goes back to their own corners to chill out a little bit?

bulletproof
05-13-2006, 10:38 AM
Can I recommend that everyone goes back to their own corners to chill out a little bit?

Um, I apologized for the misunderstanding. I was chilled out already. I thought it was pretty clear that my post about his award was in jest.

vapacersfan
05-13-2006, 11:19 AM
Give it a rest - I am sorry if my typo fustrated you

I have grown exhausted with you and pretty much should put both you and VA on ignore

And VA - Kravitz has had plenty of asinine columns - but in my opinion some people just can't stand anything he writes - so I defended the guy... maybe that will get me banned from the digest (if it was up to you)

You guys can continue trashing me, my words, whatever - but for this thread, I am just done

Its funny, you have enjoyed attacking me since I started posting here, but when you finally get the point of my post (after you stopped patting yourself on the back) you are tired of me.

Thats cool, put me on ignore. I wont lose any sleep over it.

And no, I have no problem with people defending anyone (not that I have any power here to start off with).

vapacersfan
05-13-2006, 11:25 AM
VA, you're not helping your cause here. And if this "you're right, i'm so stupid" is another attempt at sarcasm you're getting worse and worse at explaining yourself. You were wrong in the first place; maybe an "oops" would be a better idea?

An article, and an opinion column, are entirely different.

Bob's job is to have an opinion.

Discredit wikipedia all you want, but this definition is pretty good. Please come to terms with it without all the drama.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columnist

That's exactly what Bob does.

Sorry Jay, I wasn’t aware I had a cause here.

I am almost certain I did admit I made a mistake.

From my post:


It's a matter of technicality, but you are right, he is not a reporter.


My point still stands, he should not be taken as gospel, the way some people here do and jump down other throats when anyone questions what he says.


I admitted I made a mistake. I am/was aware of the difference, but I never knew the name for it, and so if it wasn’t clear enough from my previous post “I was wrong, I admit that.”


As for me being sarcastic, that I was not. I was being dead serious. I made my point pretty obvious. Some people here come here with those sunshine articles, and there are certain people that just want to come and stir things up and say how soft the reporting is.

Bob has nothing but negative crap to say, and it gets old. If you want to defend it, fine. But the man is not right 100% of the time, and some posters here want you to take everything he writes as gospel. If me saying I don’t agree with that hurts my cause, then so be it. I will not take anything anyone says as gospel, esp. not a reporter who is simply doing it just to stir the pot. Even if that is what he gets paid to do.

I have had no drama in this thread, as a matter of fact I never came out pointing fingers about myself and Shade not getting the bottom line and bragging about my awards from the AP.

DisplacedKnick
05-13-2006, 11:32 AM
I like wikipedia. :blush: Am I not supposed to?

Depends - how many letters do you have after your name?

I'm on an academic Medieval History List and they've discussed Wikipedia content, the fact that it's not peer-reviewed and anyone can go on and edit entries. Someone suggested people start going in and entering incorrect information so it would be discredited.

To be fair, this was shot down by the majority of members but some Phd's supported it which is either disgusting or depressing - I'm not sure which.

bulletproof
05-13-2006, 11:43 AM
Depends - how many letters do you have after your name?

I'm on an academic Medieval History List and they've discussed Wikipedia content, the fact that it's not peer-reviewed and anyone can go on and edit entries. Someone suggested people start going in and entering incorrect information so it would be discredited.

To be fair, this was shot down by the majority of members but some Phd's supported it which is either disgusting or depressing - I'm not sure which.

I should clarify. I like it as a quick web resource. But it is a little disconcerting that anyone can go on and edit entries.

Shade
05-13-2006, 12:25 PM
The thing about Bird, and other celebrities in general, is that his reputation preceeds him. Pretty much everyone is aware of who Larry Bird is, so for him to change something like his speech this late in the game is pointless. You either respect Bird for his accomplishments or you don't. You wither see him as an intellectual based on those achievements, or you don't. His speech has nothing to do with it.

If he were just a basic, no-name corporate individual, then yes, the argument would have considerably more validity.

Peck
05-13-2006, 12:38 PM
I'm a funny guy.


Your opinions always make me laugh.:D ;)

Los Angeles
05-13-2006, 01:05 PM
Depends - how many letters do you have after your name?

I'm on an academic Medieval History List and they've discussed Wikipedia content, the fact that it's not peer-reviewed and anyone can go on and edit entries. Someone suggested people start going in and entering incorrect information so it would be discredited.

To be fair, this was shot down by the majority of members but some Phd's supported it which is either disgusting or depressing - I'm not sure which.
But the genius of it is this:

If no entry exists for a small organization, or a local weather phenomenon, or any other obscurity, you can add one. That's ****ing awesome.

bulletproof
05-13-2006, 04:15 PM
I found my humanity in this thread.

bulletproof
06-06-2006, 01:09 PM
Oh, looky here. From Dan Wetzel regarding this year's finals:

Since 1979, only seven franchises have won the NBA title, one of the most amazing stats in sports. The NBA has a strict salary cap and basketball is a game in which one single player can dominate games. Presumably, it would be a wide-open chase to the title, right? Nope.

Since the start of the Reagan Administration, it has been nothing but the Lakers, Celtics, 76ers, Pistons, Bulls, Rockets and Spurs, with teams such as L.A. and Detroit having more than one run of dominance. Institutional might matters here.

During the same period, Major League Baseball, which supposedly features the least parity, has had 18 different franchises win the World Series (and they even cancelled the 1994 series). The NFL has had 13 franchises win the Super Bowl, the NHL crowning 11 Stanley Cup winners.

Neither Dallas nor Miami have ever won it all, so a new fan base will get to celebrate.

This means we have fresh blood, new hope and big memories from big stars coming. It should be great – a perfect exclamation point to an incredible spring.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AkskjkPP20jsZsUGhfg5hFu8vLYF?slug=dw-finals060606&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

NuffSaid
06-06-2006, 01:53 PM
It's easy to critisize someone after the fact, but Bruno goes farther towards putting things well into perspective.

Al Harrington wasn't willing to wait his turn to be a starter here whether it be at PF or SF. So, he went to DW/Bird and said, "get me out of here." They obliged him, and now he's wishing he had shown patients and maturity.

How many of you Pacers fans would have been screaming bloody murder had DW/Bird just let Artest go for little or nothing near his worth? I know I would have!! So, I'm glad they waited until they were able to get something of value for him. I don't think anyone would have been satisfied to have acquired Maggotte only to see him sit on the bench in street clothes while the team continued to go through its struggles. And I won't even touch the prospect of trading for Bonzi Wells. No way do you trade a headcase for a headcase.

This team needed somebody who could come in a play right away and contribute. Peja did that. Hopefully, a sensable deal can be worked out where either Peja is able to stay or a decent sign-n-trade is negotiated and the Pacers are still able to come out ahead somehow. Either way, I'm satisfied that they didn't just settle for anything even if it means they ultimately end up having "rented" Peja for a little while.

I think Granger and Harrison are going pay big dividens for this team sooner rather than later. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to see both of them have big seasons for '06-07. Same with Sarunas. I think the longer season hurt him not to mention everything else that was going on with this team (injuries, rotations, familiarity w/the NBA game, etc.). Next year will be different for him.

So, I wouldn't put too much stock in Kravitz' article. Then again, as homeristic as Bruno's rebuttle sounds you just have to have faith that Pacers mgmt will do what's in the best interest of the franchise and that the players themselves to perform a self-check and make their own adjustments and get better.