PDA

View Full Version : Kravitz} This team is making all the wrong moves



Will Galen
07-25-2006, 03:00 AM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060725/COLUMNISTS01/607250391/1088/SPORTS04

July 25, 2006

bob kravitz
This team is making all the wrong moves

I wrote it a few weeks ago and I will write it again: The Pacers are wheeling and dealing their way straight to the NBA draft lottery. And you know what? When they finally make this deal that brings Al Harrington to Indiana, the same Baby Al who never once showed up in the postseason during his first incarnation here, I'll write it again.

Lottery, baby.
Let the Greg Oden Sweepstakes begin.
Can anybody outside of the Pacers organization tell me what they're trying to accomplish here?"

When I said, "Blow the thing up," I meant, "Get rid of the core players, the bad apples, take the hit and rebuild from the bottom." What they're doing, though, is tinkering around the edges, putting rouge on a pig. They've made moves, yes, but moves to make them appreciably better? Please.

Everybody agreed when Anthony Johnson said after the Pacers' season-ending loss to New Jersey that they needed to change the "culture" of the locker room. And yet, I'm looking at these moves so far, and I see Indiana dealing away all of their best locker room citizens, leaving the knuckleheads behind.

They let Peja Stojakovic go -- fine. The price was too high, and that trade exception will prove valuable if they use it to get Harrington.

The Austin Croshere deal, OK, a wash. The Pacers will miss his professionalism, but Marquis Daniels will be productive.

But these latest two moves -- trading Johnson for a used peach basket and letting Fred Jones walk -- make absolutely no sense to me.

I admit it: I'm an A.J. fan. Like him personally, like him as a player. Was he a top-flight starting point guard on a title-contending team? Absolutely not. But for two straight years, he was this team's salvation, and clearly the best point guard on the current roster (damning with faint praise, I know).

While the lamentable Jamaal Tinsley was cashing his paycheck and Sarunas Jasikevicius was pouting and wishing he was back in Israel, Johnson was the one true pro who played with an oversized heart.

Clearly, he wasn't happy Pacers president Larry Bird signed Jasikevicius for all that money, but at least he took that anger, channeled it and played with the kind of passion we didn't often see from his teammates last year.

So for a player who averaged 20 points per game in last year's playoffs, including 40 in an elimination game, the Pacers got a 38-year-old baby-sitter (Darrell Armstrong) and two nobodies who might not make the roster.
Hmmm.

If I didn't know any better -- wait, I don't know any better -- I'd wonder if Bird isn't trying to cover himself on the Jasikevicius signing. Little wonder coach Rick Carlisle hasn't gotten a contract extension: He's not sharp enough to find a way to get big-time minutes for a slow point guard who can't defend anybody and left his 3-point shot in a Tel Aviv safe-deposit box.

If the Pacers go into next year with Tinsley, Jasikevicius and Armstrong playing point guard, they will not only make the lottery, but get a bunch of ping-pong balls.

Seriously, what has Tinsley ever done to make anybody think he's capable of staying healthy for more than 60 games?

The same people who are counting on him to stay on the floor next season are the ones who believed Ron Artest could behave himself and lead the Pacers to a championship.

Right.

And how did that one work out?

I can understand if they couldn't trade Tinsley, but that, too, goes back to the front office, and specifically CEO Donnie Walsh. Tinsley, incredibly, is signed through 2011. I just can't believe Walsh didn't give me an extension, too. Lord knows, I've had three better years than Tinsley. And I've played hurt.

As for Jones, there's no surprise there; the former first-round pick fell out of favor long ago. But if the professed idea is to make the Pacers more of an up-tempo team, it would seem to make sense that you'd keep your best athlete. Two years ago, remember, Jones got more minutes than any other Pacer, and helped the team reach the second round of the playoffs.

In many ways, Jones, like Johnson, was a victim of The Brawl in November 2004 -- which for this organization is the gift that keeps giving. During the suspensions, Jones, Johnson and others got a chance to strut their stuff. When the marquee players returned, though, they were sent back to the bench, where they never fully accepted their roles.

Really, though, could you blame them? Johnson was playing behind Tinsley and Jasikevicius. Jones was playing behind Stephen Jackson. If I was stuck behind those guys, I'd be bristling, too.

Unless the Pacers do something beyond a Harrington trade, unless they pull off something so mind-boggling, it reduces ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith to stunned silence, this team is lottery-bound.

If I'm wrong, feel free to clip and save, and then broil with a nice béarnaise and some asparagus tips on the side. Oh, and some of the Larry Bird Legends wine, maybe a nice cabernet sauvignon. Good for my heart, you know.

rexnom
07-25-2006, 03:04 AM
Wow...I am stunned and speechless.

Tell us Bob-o, what would you be doing?

Kstat
07-25-2006, 03:09 AM
:laugh: now THIS is venomous......

While I share his concern over basically trading every good soldier on the roster except Granger, i dont think the pacers will land in the lottery.

Hicks
07-25-2006, 03:14 AM
:lmao:

That's my first, second, and third reaction to this crap. Yeah, adding Al Harrington without trading a player to Atlanta is gonna lead us to a 1/4 chance of #1, baby! :laugh:

Please. I don't care if you're Bball's jaded, cynical Uncle, you know damn well we're not missing the playoffs with the team we'll have post-Al trade.

Will Galen
07-25-2006, 03:15 AM
:laugh: now THIS is venomous......

While I share his concern over basically trading every good soldier on the roster except Granger, i dont think the pacers will land in the lottery.

This is probably because Donnie wouldn't give him an interview or something. Well on second thought Kavitz doesn't need an excuse to rip people, he does it because it's who he is.

rexnom
07-25-2006, 03:17 AM
Deadline time?

Lord Helmet
07-25-2006, 03:20 AM
Lottery-bound? Are you ****ing serious, Bob?

jjbjjbjjb
07-25-2006, 03:21 AM
Sounds like the Kravitz plan was to trade all the starters but Danny, get junk and draft picks back, and start an AJ/Fred Jones backcourt in '06-07. And he complains about the Pacers being lottery bound?!

Anthem hit it right on the head, Kravitz is nothing but a troll.

t1hs0n
07-25-2006, 03:24 AM
Now thats just silly.

denyfizle
07-25-2006, 04:17 AM
this is journalism? i can write this any day on my scratch paper. Kravitz is so pathetic. i get that he disagrees with the moves most of our professional teams have made, but i don't want to read such empty negative garbage all the time. somebody should give this guy a memo on constructive criticism- or a midol would probably work for him. what a sad f00l.

NorCal_Pacerfan
07-25-2006, 04:40 AM
He did get this right:

"Seriously, what has Tinsley ever done to make anybody think he's capable of staying healthy for more than 60 games?"

If he stays on track, he'll only play 50.

TheSauceMaster
07-25-2006, 05:30 AM
What I see is we're playing our cards Tinsley can stay healthy for most of a whole season. If Tinsely remains true too his past 2 yrs then BoB may not be too far off , cause if Tinsley goes down it means is Jasikevicius is the Starting PG.

Not saying I agree with all he said , but I would think even the most fanatic fanboy would have a big concern about how much we are banking on Tinsley to stay health. Without a healthy Tinsely this team is just average and I'm not saying only Tinsely's health is important but it's probably our weakest point right now.

Mourning
07-25-2006, 05:35 AM
Bball, I think you have an admirer;).


And, like Jose wrote, yes, we are mediocre IF Tinsley goes down (and he will) or IF we don't get another starting PG.

Sarunas can play, but he's definitely NOT a starter.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

skyfire
07-25-2006, 05:59 AM
The Austin Croshere deal, OK, a wash. The Pacers will miss his professionalism, but Marquis Daniels will be productive.


rofl, that is the best quote in the article.

I'm glad we let Fred walk. He made some nice highlights, but his absolute lack of a right hand meant that any team that scouted him properly could almost completely negate his effectiveness when his outside shot wasn't on. He was an undersized SG who couldn't play the point at all.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 07:24 AM
What they're doing, though, is tinkering around the edges, putting rouge on a pig.

It does start to paint a picture of a team putting up new siding on a house that has rotten floor joists.

My God, Bball is Kravitz.

Anthem
07-25-2006, 07:35 AM
In a member of an online message board, such behavior is considered the hallmark of a troll.

At the Indystar, however, it makes him a hard-hitting journalist.

I'd rather read Peck, any day of the week.
Is it ok to quote myself for truth?

Second line.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 07:39 AM
If I'm wrong, feel free to clip and save, and then broil with a nice béarnaise and some asparagus tips on the side. Oh, and some of the Larry Bird Legends wine, maybe a nice cabernet sauvignon. Good for my heart, you know.
Anyone ever see the film, "Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe." It's a short film where the filmmaker Werner Herzog actually gets up in front of an audience, cooks a leather shoe and actually eats it, keeping a promise he made to Erroll Morris years earlier that if Morris ever made a film, he'd eat his shoe.

Kravitz doesn't have that kind of integrity. He just makes a glib, empty remark like this, which basically says, Don't take anything I ever write seriously, folks."

indygeezer
07-25-2006, 07:43 AM
OK so you have no concerns????

We STILL have both Tinsley and Jalen Wannabe Jackson on the team. Going into the off-season they were my two BIGGEST concerns and they are still here. Sorry but Tinsley has other issues besides health i.e. constantly trying to drive against someone who is clearly dominating him, and SJackson has yet to improve his attitude since the brawl. There is a reason Jax and this team were being booed and IMO these reasons have yet to be addressed.

RWB
07-25-2006, 07:48 AM
This is another fine example why Bob came to Indy. He can spout all he wants here without any type of accountability. At least in Denver even goofy Woody Paige would challenge him, here nobody because there is only one paper.

Bobbie 'National Enquirer' Kravitz...

Now I understand once again how people believe "look he's doing his job, people are talking". When will the STAR finally realize everyone talks about it not because of being informed, but rather how the man is so uninformed?

Do you think Kravitz has the ability to ever break a story? I know he's not the beat writer, but it does state on the Star site he is a sports reporter. Well he'll never be able to because he has alienated anyone who would know what's really going on. His dreams of being a guest host on PTI, or Around the Horn, or Best Damn is not going to happen. No Bob, you lost your job in Denver and the warm and fuzzy known as Indy was the last large market paper that would take you. But don't worry, I think our local little league could use a beat writer once you're fired....

In the 8 to 9 year old division Dairy Queen beat Hardees 4-0. A brilliant pitching display by 9 year old Kevin Thompson was too much for the badly coached Hardees team. Let me just say, I know Brad Johnson is the fire chief, but as the coach of Hardees why he put Timmy Smith in center field is beyond me. You know Timmy, the kid that can't catch anything. Well as I have been writing all along, I knew Timmy wasn't the answer, but Coach Thompson just can't see it. I don't care if the Coach has too answer to all those parents. He should have cut Timmy that first day during tryouts. Of course I wasn't there to see the tryouts, but that doesn't matter because I just knew it. blah blah blah.........Bob Kravitz

Putnam
07-25-2006, 07:54 AM
Forget Kravitz.


Listen to indygeezer!

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 07:54 AM
OK so you have no concerns????

We STILL have both Tinsley and Jalen Wannabe Jackson on the team. Going into the off-season they were my two BIGGEST concerns and they are still here. Sorry but Tinsley has other issues besides health i.e. constantly trying to drive against someone who is clearly dominating him, and SJackson has yet to improve his attitude since the brawl. There is a reason Jax and this team were being booed and IMO these reasons have yet to be addressed.

When does the season start, geez? What day is today?

Unclebuck
07-25-2006, 07:57 AM
Croshere for Daniels a wash?

OK, Kravitz is now officially an idiot.

That is the only sentence in the whole column I've read so far. But if he really beleives that than he just confirmed what I've thought all along he is an idiot when it comes to the NBA.

For those of you who defend Bob by saying his job is to be controversile, I agree that is his job, but his job also is not to be an idiot. He has no credibility when it comes to the NBA. None.


EDit: OK now I've read the whole column, he makes some decent points about Tinsley and AJ and Fred, but he still has no credibility with me

microwave_oven
07-25-2006, 08:04 AM
No no Bob, please, tell us how you really feel.

This is grade A crap journalism.

Trader Joe
07-25-2006, 08:12 AM
the fact is guys Kravitz will never be happy. If we traded for Nash, Wade, Lebron, and Yao tomorrow he would still find something to complain about. Thats just his niche.

D-BONE
07-25-2006, 08:20 AM
IMO Kravitz makes only one point I agree with. The PG situation is dangerously flimsy. I hope we'll be able to bring in somebody else there yet.

If we don't, it's like saying IF Tins stays healty (lol) and IF Saras improves dramatically (another huge IF), we'll be OK in the PG dept. I'm not confident heading into the season riding on this mantra.

I say just throw caution to the wind and announce Marquis as the starting PG now. He'll probably end up there anyway once Tins is banged up after 25 games. Pretty much sums up how I feel about Saras and JT.

Gyron
07-25-2006, 08:34 AM
Anyone else notice that this article comes out just after the thread about his last pile of crap was bumped yesterday saying something to the effect of "I wonder how he feels now"

I'm convinced that he reads this board and often and gets his ideas from here.

RWB
07-25-2006, 08:37 AM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060725/COLUMNISTS01/607250391/1088/SPORTS04

July 25, 2006

[b]bob kravitz

Can anybody outside of the Pacers organization tell me what they're trying to accomplish here?"



So basically what you're saying Bob is......."I've pissed off everyone in the Pacers oranization so I can't get any real information. I'm too lazy to do the footwork or make the phone calls so please will someone else help me out".

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 08:38 AM
I'm convinced that he reads this board and often and gets his ideas from here.

I'm convinced Bball is Kravitz.

IUColtPacerFan
07-25-2006, 08:41 AM
I'm convinced Bball is Kravitz.

It is quite possible. They are both eternal pessimists, but I think Bball writes a little better. Unless, he tries to dumb down his writing for RATS.

RWB
07-25-2006, 08:52 AM
I'm convinced Bball is Kravitz.

Nope, can't be, Bball has a passion for the Pacers and wants to see them do well. Bob on the other hand loves failure over victory seeing he is use to failing.

Run out of town by Woody Paige. :lol:

FrenchConnection
07-25-2006, 08:56 AM
Anyone else notice that this article comes out just after the thread about his last pile of crap was bumped yesterday saying something to the effect of "I wonder how he feels now"

I'm convinced that he reads this board and often and gets his ideas from here.

He's got nothing to write about until Colts camp starts, so I wouldn't doubt if he does read this board.

Harddrive7
07-25-2006, 09:03 AM
Nope, can't be, Bball has a passion for the Pacers and wants to see them do well. Bob on the other hand loves failure over victory seeing he is use to failing.

Run out of town by Woody Paige. :lol:


Oh boy, Kravitz is Indytoad

indygeezer
07-25-2006, 09:09 AM
When does the season start, geez? What day is today?


Completely agree....there can still be alot of changes BUT......the message that has been sent so far is not encouraging and in fact somewhat puzzling.


As for Kravitz.........Sometimes I find him agreeable and sometimes not but what I notice is there are alot of posters on this site that complain that the Pacers and TPTB in general get a free pass from the media. The complaint is there is no real accountabilty and yet when someone (Kravitz) does dare to say something negative the masses rise up to riot. Just a general observation about cake and eating.

RWB
07-25-2006, 09:12 AM
He's got nothing to write about until Colts camp starts,

Too bad he never shows up to actually learn what's going on. Indy Geez has been to camp more than Kravitz.

Bball
07-25-2006, 09:23 AM
I can't help it... I like the fact Kravitz challenges TPTB in Pacerland and questions their moves (and lack of moves) in print in a major newspaper... in the city.

Whether I agree or not... whether it's premature or not... I don't care.
Management has gotten a free pass for too long in this city and that only encouraged a slow, prodding approach.

And Kravitz is right... as of right now they are only putting new siding on a house with a rotten floor... Errrrrr putting rouge on a pig.

-Bball

BillS
07-25-2006, 09:25 AM
Let me figure this out.

So far, we've moved two of our starters from last year. We've moved or dropped some of our highest contracts. We've positioned ourselves to get a player even :badger: sees as positive given the circumstances.

Unfortunately, that isn't enough, I guess.

Would I like to see Jackson or Tinsley moved? Sure, that's my preference, but there's no denying that Jackson - for all the ways he pisses me off - is one of the more dedicated players on the team. There's no question that if Tinsley is healthy and willing to play, he is a stronger PG than we're likely to get without trading one of our other cornerstones away.

For all of the complaining about chemistry being the issue and talent being secondary, we have traded for some players with rather strong positive reputations in the locker room and yet it still isn't what Bob wanted. Translation - of <i>course</i> it's about talent.

My biggest question is whether some of these fine veteran locker room presences like Armstrong have the ability to change the attitude of the remaining players. It is one of the reasons I want to keep Pollard even if he is on the bench much of the time.

What I would expect is that November will be a train wreck no matter what happens. Everyone will get a chance to say "I told you so" and decamp for the Bulls or the Cavs or whomever. The attitude of the team through this period will make a clear statement on how the rest of the season will go.

What I want to see is how things move forward through camp and November, then see if we are playing well after the break. After all, recent years where we played well to begin the season haven't worked out very well, have they?

Anyone who thinks that any blockbuster trade will suddenly make the Pacers a lock for the championship is dreaming. And anyone who thinks that we'll be one of the three worst teams in the league even if we stop right now is deluded.

Kegboy
07-25-2006, 10:01 AM
Everyone will get a chance to say "I told you so" and decamp for the Bulls or the Cavs or whomever.

:woohoo:


The attitude of the team through this period will make a clear statement on how the rest of the season will go.

What I want to see is how things move forward through camp and November, then see if we are playing well after the break. After all, recent years where we played well to begin the season haven't worked out very well, have they?

Bill, do you believe Rick would survive such an event?

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 10:06 AM
OMG PANIC!

BillS
07-25-2006, 10:07 AM
The attitude of the team through this period will make a clear statement on how the rest of the season will go.

What I want to see is how things move forward through camp and November, then see if we are playing well after the break. After all, recent years where we played well to begin the season haven't worked out very well, have they?



Bill, do you believe Rick would survive such an event?

My gut agrees with those who say that if Rick doesn't get his extension then he won't survive anything but a championship season.

However, I think if Rick actually opens up the offense (and I don't mean that he gives up calling plays but that he both spreads the floor through passing rather than post plays AND also gives a little more flexibility on defense to allow for faster offensive completions) then he may very well survive even if the team takes a while to get into it. Partly because the team will be looser and easier to like and partly because it seems many fans will enjoy the play of the team more.

I think it all depends on the perception of whether the team is improving under Rick and whether he can take them to the next level.

DisplacedKnick
07-25-2006, 10:08 AM
No no Bob, please, tell us how you really feel.

This is grade A crap journalism.

It's absolutely crap journalism. However it's not bad as an editorial since the goal of that is to get everyone excited and talking about it. I expect 150 replies on this thread when it's all done. If that happens, he's done his job.

BTW - I disagree with a lot he says but the AJ deal doesn't make a lot of sense and IMO Harrington won't help you much. I'll wait until after the deal goes through to explain why I think that.

Kegboy
07-25-2006, 10:15 AM
BTW - I disagree with a lot he says but the AJ deal doesn't make a lot of sense and IMO Harrington won't help you much. I'll wait until after the deal goes through to explain why I think that.

I was thinking the same thing. I started to write something, but decided I'd wait until the deal is done. Now I'll just let you do it. Thanks Rim!

Suaveness
07-25-2006, 10:15 AM
The PG situation is a bit worrisome...well, ok, VERY worrisome. But lottery? Come on...

Roy Munson
07-25-2006, 10:18 AM
Wow...I am stunned and speechless.

Tell us Bob-o, what would you be doing?

He DID tell us. He would get rid of Tinsley and Jackson.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 10:20 AM
I can't help it... I like the fact Kravitz challenges TPTB in Pacerland and questions their moves (and lack of moves) in print in a major newspaper... in the city.

Whether I agree or not... whether it's premature or not... I don't care.
Management has gotten a free pass for too long in this city and that only encouraged a slow, prodding approach.

You crack me up. You think Kravitz's hard-hitting "journalism" precipitated all this activity.

sweabs
07-25-2006, 10:22 AM
IMO Harrington won't help you much. I'll wait until after the deal goes through to explain why I think that.

I'm in the same boat. I can't get myself too excited over it. I like Al as a person and I think he'll be good for team chemistry in many regards.

But if we go back a couple years to when he was a free agent and about to leave our team, his reasoning was that he wanted a starting position. At that time we had both of our forward positions locked up already (Ron & JO), and couldn't make the promise to Al.

Well, what has changed since then? In my opinion, we still have our two forward positions locked up in Granger and JO. You need your best players playing at the position of which they are most comfortable at. JO should be playing PF, and Granger should be playing SF. And yes, I want them both starting.

Sure, we can pretend that JO is a centre, but we've tried it before and I don't think it's ever worked out exceptionally well. A couple years ago we weren't willing to make that change, but now we are? Is it because of this "New NBA" that we hear so many references to? Do we feel as though JO can now miraculously become a legit 5 in this league because you apparently don't need a big, bruising-type centre anymore? Last time I checked, your centre still needs to be a physical and aggressive presence underneath the boards, and has to be able to rebound the ball and box out guys (none of which are JO's strongpoints).

I hate getting out-rebounded by teams on a consistent basis, and it seems to me that it happened more often than not when we played JO at the 5 spot. We're lucky we have such a strong rebounder in Danny, but the question then becomes how much playing time will Rick allow for him?

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 10:22 AM
Hook. Line. Sinker.

You've all taken the bait.

And its not that bad of an article. This board is constantly guilty of killing the messenger when he's actually been right about stuff in Pacerland much more than he's been wrong. Maybe the fact that he's kept his distance (and no emotional attachment) gives him a better perspective than the cuddly bunny or us emotional fans (whether jaded or not...)

Maybe he really can see the forest instead of the trees.

:shrug:

Right now we're still around #6-10 in the East, so the lottery is a reasonably possible outcome. We're certainly not better than Detroit, Miami or Cleveland. I don't think we're better - post Harrington - than Washington, Chicago, or New Jersey. And everybody else but Altanta, New York, and Toronto is getting better.

We've got to address the SJax issue. I'd still like Foster and Saras moved. And we need more 'legit' depth at center, PG, and maybe SF (assuming Shawne Williams never sees the light of day under Carlisle.) And the chemistry, with lame duck Ricky C., is very dicey. For 2007-08, with a new coach and this rebuilding process complete... that's a different story.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 10:25 AM
Hook. Line. Sinker.

You've all taken the bait.

And its not that bad of an article. This board is constantly guilty of killing the messenger when he's actually been right about stuff in Pacerland much more than he's been wrong. Maybe the fact that he's kept his distance (and no emotional attachment) gives him a better perspective than the cuddly bunny or us emotional fans (whether jaded or not...)

Maybe he really can see the forest instead of the trees.

:shrug:

You gotta be joking.

Let's put your assertion to the test...

He said this team is lottery bound two times in as many weeks. I'll bookmark this thread and we'll see at the end of the season if "he's actually been right about stuff in Pacerland much more than he's been wrong." Or if this is just par for the course.

Putnam
07-25-2006, 10:27 AM
^^^ Good response by BillS. But...



there's no denying that Jackson - for all the ways he pisses me off - is one of the more dedicated players on the team.



I'll deny it.

Discipline is a necessary quality for an athlete or anyone else. A truly dedicated player disciplines himself to do what the team needs him to do.

Jack was not self-disciplined, ergo not dedicated.

Give the guy all the credit he deserves. Jack played in 81 games, and lead the team in minutes. He played when he was obviously hurt. I admit everything about Jackson that is true, so don't call me a hater.

But he was not dedicated to the team. Jackson played inside himself, and he played his game. Sometimes he was as hostile to his own coach and teammates as to the other team. Not all the time, but there were enought incidents during the playoffs alone to refute the "Jackson is dedicated" notion.

(Ex. blaming Granger for the defensive lapse that allowed Vince Carter to score a last second game winner. You don't say things like that when you're dedicated to your team. And the team is the only thing a Pacers player should be dedicated to when he's on the floor.)

Jackson fustrates me so much I could choke a cat.

JayRedd
07-25-2006, 10:30 AM
He DID tell us. He would get rid of Tinsley and Jackson.

I'm sure he would try. But, he and all of us need to understand that getting rid of Tinsley and Jackson is not as simple as making a phone call. These guys both have long-term deals and have reached their peak value in the NBA--a peak which isn't all that high. Players like that, especially when you add in their specific character/injury issues, are VERY difficult to trade without taking on another equally problematic contract/player. So, we can make a move just to make a move. But it's essentially trading chlamydia for syphilis.

If you want, I'm sure we could get Jerome James. Or Kenyon Martin. Maybe Darius Miles. Mike Dunleavy, anyone?

But people like Kravitz who probably think Larry can call up the Bucks and trade Jackson for Magloire or anything else that would help this team on-the-court and on the payroll are in a dream world.

If anyone wanted these guys, they'd be gone by now. Because I'm pretty sure the reason they're still here has little to do with Bird/Walsh wanting them on this team.

MSA2CF
07-25-2006, 10:31 AM
I don't see a big problem with what Mr. Bob wrote. It sounded a heck of a lot like what I read here on PD day in and day out, which makes it surprising to me why so many people here this morning are so against what was written. When I read the editorial, which by the way is accomplishing its goal by sparking discussion (aka good journalism, at least in my opinion..haha, opinion), I thought posters here would identify with Mr. Bob. Guess I was wrong. That said, I don't believe he watches enough of the Pacers/NBA to really be an expert when he writes about them; alas, I believe that's part of what goes in to being a professional columnist. You don't always have the time or energy to watch all the events and then be expected to be an expert on all of them. I guess I'm just not being as hard on Mr. Bob as ya'll are.

But perhaps that has to do with the fact that I almost agree with him on this column. Almost agree...I don't think the Pacers are lottery bound, but they really do need to do something about the big three (which has really come down to the big two nowadays).

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 10:32 AM
I'm in the same boat. I can't get myself too excited over it. I like Al as a person and I think he'll be good for team chemistry in many regards.

But if we go back a couple years to when he was a free agent and about to leave our team, his reasoning was that he wanted a starting position. At that time we had both of our forward positions locked up already (Ron & JO), and couldn't make the promise to Al.

Well, what has changed since then? In my opinion, we still have our two forward positions locked up in Granger and JO. You need your best players playing at the position of which they are most comfortable at. JO should be playing PF, and Granger should be playing SF. And yes, I want them both starting.

Sure, we can pretend that JO is a centre, but we've tried it before and I don't think it's ever worked out exceptionally well. A couple years ago we weren't willing to make that change, but now we are? Is it because of this "New NBA" that we hear so many references to? Do we feel as though JO can now miraculously become a legit 5 in this league because you apparently don't need a big, bruising-type centre anymore? Last time I checked, your centre still needs to be a physical and aggressive presence underneath the boards, and has to be able to rebound the ball and box out guys (none of which are JO's strongpoints).

I hate getting out-rebounded by teams on a consistent basis, and it seems to me that it happened more often than not when we played JO at the 5 spot. We're lucky we have such a strong rebounder in Danny, but the question then becomes how much playing time will Rick allow for him?

Well, if we're going to make JO a center, I'm glad that we are at least going all-out with it and bringing in a very good PF to play with JO, instead of sticking him next to a one-dimensional Jeff Foster.

I think the JO/Al/Danny frontcourt with David subbing in as the first big could potentially be very, very good - as long as JO takes his game up a notch and stays healthy.

JayRedd
07-25-2006, 10:36 AM
You don't always have the time or energy to watch all the events and then be expected to be an expert on all of them. I guess I'm just not being as hard on Mr. Bob as ya'll are.

Yeah....it's a little unfair to expect a sportswriter to actually watch the sports he/she writes about. :rolleyes:

DisplacedKnick
07-25-2006, 10:39 AM
You gotta be joking.

Let's put your assertion to the test...

He said this team is lottery bound two times in as many weeks. I'll bookmark this thread and we'll see at the end of the season if "he's actually been right about stuff in Pacerland much more than he's been wrong." Or if this is just par for the course.

IF Tinsley only plays his usual 50 games this season and you're forced to spend extensive time with Saras, Armstrong (gag) or Daniels (retch) as your starting PG, I don't think he's wrong.

Roy Munson
07-25-2006, 10:42 AM
Why don't all you guys who are hysterical about this article just keep your browser locked on Pacers.com where you will be safe from having to read anything negative about the home team.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 10:43 AM
But perhaps that has to do with the fact that I almost agree with him on this column. Almost agree...I don't think the Pacers are lottery bound, but they really do need to do something about the big three (which has really come down to the big two nowadays).

First, I've rarely seen sportswriters get it right when it comes to their predictions and so-called inside information. They're some of the worst of the lot when it comes to reporting and speculating. Secondly, no one knows the exact "chemistry" issues the Pacers have had except those with first-hand experience. I would imagine that Larry and Donnie are better qualified to pinpoint and address those problems than any fan or pseudo sportswriter.

sweabs
07-25-2006, 10:46 AM
Well, if we're going to make JO a center, I'm glad that we are at least going all-out with it and bringing in a very good PF to play with JO, instead of sticking him next to a one-dimensional Jeff Foster.

I guess you could look at it from that perspective. But from my point of view, I've always seen Al as more of a 3 than a 4. He's another one of those guys who is stuck in between; regardless, he's still kind of small to be playing up front with a less than aggressive JO.

It seems to me as if we've almost focussed on acquiring these guys that are capable (doesn't mean it's best for them) of playing multiple positions on the floor. This way, Larry & Donnie can make whatever changes they wish to the roster without having to worry about filling a void at one specific rotation (get rid of a SF, then move a PF to SF...get rid of a PG, then move a SG to PG). It gives them more flexibility, but at the same time makes you wonder where they're going with this all. What is the direction? Or are they still waiting to see what other pieces they can get before they lock some of these "interchangeable" players into certain positions?

DisplacedKnick
07-25-2006, 10:47 AM
I'm in the same boat. I can't get myself too excited over it. I like Al as a person and I think he'll be good for team chemistry in many regards.

But if we go back a couple years to when he was a free agent and about to leave our team, his reasoning was that he wanted a starting position. At that time we had both of our forward positions locked up already (Ron & JO), and couldn't make the promise to Al.

Well, what has changed since then? In my opinion, we still have our two forward positions locked up in Granger and JO. You need your best players playing at the position of which they are most comfortable at. JO should be playing PF, and Granger should be playing SF. And yes, I want them both starting.

Sure, we can pretend that JO is a centre, but we've tried it before and I don't think it's ever worked out exceptionally well. A couple years ago we weren't willing to make that change, but now we are? Is it because of this "New NBA" that we hear so many references to? Do we feel as though JO can now miraculously become a legit 5 in this league because you apparently don't need a big, bruising-type centre anymore? Last time I checked, your centre still needs to be a physical and aggressive presence underneath the boards, and has to be able to rebound the ball and box out guys (none of which are JO's strongpoints).

I hate getting out-rebounded by teams on a consistent basis, and it seems to me that it happened more often than not when we played JO at the 5 spot. We're lucky we have such a strong rebounder in Danny, but the question then becomes how much playing time will Rick allow for him?

LOL - and now I don't have to post anything. :)

Keep in mind though that I'm a huge Danny Granger fan.

BTW - based on your current PG status, passing on Marcus Williams, stolen laptops and all, is starting to look pretty foolish.

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 10:50 AM
You gotta be joking.

Let's put your assertion to the test...

He said this team is lottery bound two times in as many weeks. I'll bookmark this thread and we'll see at the end of the season if "he's actually been right about stuff in Pacerland much more than he's been wrong." Or if this is just par for the course.

His prediction of that right-now, the team is lottery-bound, is just one piece in a body of work that has been critical of Artest, Bird, JO, Tinsley, etc. And he's been right about all of those.

What do you not get about a "snapshot."

If the rosters were locked in stone today and our competitors stayed healthy, this team would be in a competitive battle for the last playoff spot. Unless Tinsley also stayed healthy, and then they might be competing for the last home-court spot for the first round.

If they're able to improve the team in the future then that's in the future. They've made some nice moves this summer for 2-3 years down the road. I think the expectation of immediate results, especially with a lame-duck coach that seems to be on a different page than both management and the players (who may not be on the same page themselves) is VERY naive and excessively optimistic.

Long-term, these moves should pay off. Short-term (next season), probably not. Not if SJax, Carlisle, etc. are still around. And as I've been saying all along, to me the first half of the season should be a final audition for Tinsley. I have no opinion whether he should be with the team beyond the February trading deadline. I just think it would be a mistake to move him (for nothing) prior to then.

Next season is the equivalent of the Beatles' Rubber Soul and Revolver albums. There will be a lot of expirimentation, and some parts will be brilliant and others will be regrettably bad. And a couple of years from now we should hopefully see Sgt. Pepper.

:twocents:

Mourning
07-25-2006, 10:54 AM
I guess you could look at it from that perspective. But from my point of view, I've always seen Al as more of a 3 than a 4. He's another one of those guys who is stuck in between; regardless, he's still kind of small to be playing up front with a less than aggressive JO.

It seems to me as if we've almost focussed on acquiring these guys that are capable (doesn't mean it's best for them) of playing multiple positions on the floor. This way, Larry & Donnie can make whatever changes they wish to the roster without having to worry about filling a void at one specific rotation (get rid of a SF, then move a PF to SF...get rid of a PG, then move a SG to PG). It gives them more flexibility, but at the same time makes you wonder where they're going with this all. What is the direction? Or are they still waiting to see what other pieces they can get before they lock some of these "interchangeable" players into certain positions?

:amen: On the first paragraph and I am wondering the samething with regards to the second paragraph.

rexnom
07-25-2006, 10:54 AM
I'm sure he would try. But, he and all of us need to understand that getting rid of Tinsley and Jackson is not as simple as making a phone call. These guys both have long-term deals and have reached their peak value in the NBA--a peak which isn't all that high. Players like that, especially when you add in their specific character/injury issues, are VERY difficult to trade without taking on another equally problematic contract/player. So, we can make a move just to make a move. But it's essentially trading chlamydia for syphilis.

If you want, I'm sure we could get Jerome James. Or Kenyon Martin. Maybe Darius Miles. Mike Dunleavy, anyone?

But people like Kravitz who probably think Larry can call up the Bucks and trade Jackson for Magloire or anything else that would help this team on-the-court and on the payroll are in a dream world.

If anyone wanted these guys, they'd be gone by now. Because I'm pretty sure the reason they're still here has little to do with Bird/Walsh wanting them on this team.
Yes! For the love of christ. You don't think I want to move Jack and Tins for Ben Gordon, Duhon + filler? Or Jack and Tinsley for Delonte West + Kendrick Perkins + filler? Unfortunately, we aren't going to get something like that and I hate to say this but Jack and Tins are better than no Jack and no Tins.

AJ wasn't going to take us anywhere. You talk about contending, about second round, etc. AJ is not the kind of PG that gets you there. He wanted to be. We knew he couldn't be. Now...problem solved. The biggest gripe is that we didn't even get a second round pick out of it.

Fred wanted to start when we have one guy that's more talented offensively and defensively at about the same age while being more reliable, less injury-prone, and much more versatile with the same shot-selection problems (Jack), one guy who is more talented offensively and defensively, younger, more versatile and has TONS more potential (Marquis), and one guy who needs the time to develop because he is oozing potential (Flight). Are you telling me Freddie would go ahead of those three guys on any depth chart? He is perfect for an undermanned team or a poor team because he needs 10+ shots to be effective. We saw more 3-10 nights out of Freddie than 3-5, and I know we can get better out of our number one sixth man.

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 10:58 AM
I guess you could look at it from that perspective. But from my point of view, I've always seen Al as more of a 3 than a 4. He's another one of those guys who is stuck in between; regardless, he's still kind of small to be playing up front with a less than aggressive JO.


Post surgery, Al is not a very good "3" anymore.

He lost some of his lateral quickness, and his hips and trunk developed in a way that makes him a stronger post player than wing/ perimeter player.

He's essentially the same size as Elton Brand, and once you get past your initial impression - when he was 19 years old he *was* a perimeter player - I'm okay with thinking Al is a natural "4". More importantly, like Danny he's just a "forward", which seems to be the way the Pacers are re-shaping their roster. I see Al and Danny as excellent compliments at the forward spot. But yes, that means JO has to play center.

JayRedd
07-25-2006, 11:06 AM
AJ wasn't going to take us anywhere. You talk about contending, about second round, etc. AJ is not the kind of PG that gets you there. He wanted to be. We knew he couldn't be. Now...problem solved. The biggest gripe is that we didn't even get a second round pick out of it.

Fred wanted to start when we have one guy that's more talented offensively and defensively at about the same age while being more reliable, less injury-prone, and much more versatile with the same shot-selection problems (Jack), one guy who is more talented offensively and defensively, younger, more versatile and has TONS more potential (Marquis), and one guy who needs the time to develop because he is oozing potential (Flight). Are you telling me Freddie would go ahead of those three guys on any depth chart? He is perfect for an undermanned team or a poor team because he needs 10+ shots to be effective. We saw more 3-10 nights out of Freddie than 3-5, and I know we can get better out of our number one sixth man.

Exactly.

You can't have 10 guys on a roster that think they should be getting 20 mpg. In this league you need a rotation of no more than nine guys--ideally eight, and really seven in the playoffs. The rest of the roster is for injuries, foul trouble, "off nights" from you core guys, and practice.

Because of ALLLLLLLL the BS that's gone on the last two years, AJ and Freddie both got A LOT more minutes than they ever would have. And they played admirably and competed against the Kobes, Steve Nashs and Paul Pierces of the League.

Since they now have inflated views of their "NBA" value, and (assumingly) a lesser value of both the character and thus ability of Jack and Tins, they are going to think they should be getting more minutes. Minutes they won't get for the reasons Rexnom stated. That causes bitterness. And that lack of respect for your role and the belief that you are better than the more talented players ahead of you always leads to chemistry problems. Much more so, IMO, than having guys like Jack who are somewhat resprehensible people, but "good soldiers" for the team.

(And, just so you know, I would love for Jax to get hit by a train, so I'm not trying to advocate him being a Pacer as a good thing.)

AJ, while a serviceable stopgap for when Tinsley gets injured next year, is just that---a stopgap. He's not a solution going forward. And in 2-3 years when this team starts to come together (hopefully) he will be retiring. AJ was very expendable, especially if it will help this lockerroom.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 11:07 AM
His prediction of that right-now, the team is lottery-bound, is just one piece in a body of work that has been critical of Artest, Bird, JO, Tinsley, etc. And he's been right about all of those.

What do you not get about a "snapshot."
In what context has he been right about all those? He hasn't. He has no access to the team to have any real knowledge of what goes on. He's always guessing or reacting or groping in the dark for anything that might stick.



If the rosters were locked in stone today and our competitors stayed healthy, this team would be in a competitive battle for the last playoff spot. Unless Tinsley also stayed healthy, and then they might be competing for the last home-court spot for the first round.
You don't know that. I know you think you might know, but you don't. I put about as much value in you predicting the outcome of next season's playoff spots as I do in anyone. Wanna guess what that value is? Let me ask you this, when we lost Brad, did you "predict" that we would go to the ECFs the very next season?



If they're able to improve the team in the future then that's in the future.
Um, unless you noticed, Kravitz's article is projecting into the future. Double standards, Jay.



Long-term, these moves should pay off. Short-term (next season), probably not.
Again, you don't know, do you?

RWB
07-25-2006, 11:10 AM
Why don't all you guys who are hysterical about this article just keep your browser locked on Pacers.com where you will be safe from having to read anything negative about the home team.

Funny thing Roy is I haven't seen anyone complain when Wells put's down the hammer. Why? Because Wells knows something about the team.....

I think I'll start a BOB thread. The simple idea will be to list how many times he shows up at Colts camp like the other media to know what he is writing about and then we'll see how many times he writes about the Colts in his column.

Let me ask this. Does Bob Kravitz need to show up at least once at Colts camp to write an informed article on what's going on? Or can he just do that from afar?

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 11:32 AM
In what context has he been right about all those? He hasn't. He has no access to the team to have any real knowledge of what goes on. He's always guessing or reacting or groping in the dark for anything that might stick.

Then he's done a better job of blindly guessing than just about anyone else, including those with better access. Sounds good to me. I'd love to hear you opinions of stock market analysts, too.


You don't know that. I know you think you might know, but you don't. I put about as much value in you predicting the outcome of next season's playoff spots as I do in anyone. Wanna guess what that value is? Let me ask you this, when we lost Brad, did you "predict" that we would go to the ECFs the very next season?

At the time we lost Brad, Isiah was still coach. So no, of course not. Things changed. That's the point. Things must still change in Pacerland. if management stops now next season will be a mess, just like if management stopped in July of 2003 the 2003-04 season would've been a mess. I'm still holding out hope for a late summer coaching change. :devil:


Again, you don't know, do you?

What's your point? I said "should" and "probably". I didn't make any guarantees. Do you really think no one else other than Donnie & Co. are allowed to look forward and predict what's going to happen, based on things as they stand right now?.

If so, why even bother reading any articles or message boards during the summer? Just come back when training camp starts. No, check that, come back when the regular season starts. No, check that, come back right after the trading deadline. No, check that, come back when the playoffs start. No, check that, come back at the end of the NBA Finals and then - and only then - will you be able to properly "predict" last season's contenders.

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 11:33 AM
I see Al and Danny as excellent compliments at the forward spot. But yes, that means JO has to play center.

Same here....

D-BONE
07-25-2006, 11:39 AM
IF Tinsley only plays his usual 50 games this season and you're forced to spend extensive time with Saras, Armstrong (gag) or Daniels (retch) as your starting PG, I don't think he's wrong.

This is precisely the point I was attempting to make earlier about the PG depth chart as of now. I find this a serious situation.

I think our best-case ceiling right now would be like #5 seed EC. So if the scenario DK describes above plays out, (And why wouldn't it given Tins's injury history?) we could feasibly back right into the lottery.

The most important aspect of a successful team IMO is stability/leadership/performance at the point. Arguably, we've got decent depth and talent at the other positions. But with your glaring weakness at PG, it's hard to hide it.

Shade
07-25-2006, 11:47 AM
Doug should be in here to rip y'all any minute now. :tap: :whistle: :D

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 11:50 AM
At the time we lost Brad, Isiah was still coach. So no, of course not. Things changed. That's the point. Things must still change in Pacerland. if management stops now next season will be a mess, just like if management stopped in July of 2003 the 2003-04 season would've been a mess. I'm still holding out hope for a late summer coaching change. :devil:
I'm talking about before the season started. After we got Rick.



What's your point? I said "should" and "probably". I didn't make any guarantees.

If the rosters were locked in stone today and our competitors stayed healthy, this team would be in a competitive battle for the last playoff spot.
Sounds like a pretty definitive statement to me.

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 12:01 PM
I'm talking about before the season started. After we got Rick.

Okay. I started doing the whole "message board" thing when that season's training camp started. So I don't remember what I predicted but I was optimistic enough to pick up a bad, time-consuming habit of hanging out on-line with all of you guys.

:-p
----------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like a pretty definitive statement to me.

Then I'll need to double-check the definition of "If." I thought I was talking about the hypothetical compound possibility that (god-forbid) there are no more roster changes and our competitors staying healthy. Both of which are admittedly likely to be untrue.

grace
07-25-2006, 12:26 PM
You know damn well we're not missing the playoffs with the team we'll have post-Al trade.

No, I don't know that. This is the Pacers remember. "One Goal" is code for "If there's a way to :censored: this up we'll find it".
----------------------------------------------------------

I'm convinced that he reads this board and often and gets his ideas from here.

:duh: Of course he gets his ideas from here.

Right about now I'm sure he's wondering where all the people are who usually stick up for him. (Of course I'm still on the first page of the thread so maybe they show up later.)









I was going to say for once I agree with him, but I don't feel like getting lynched today.
----------------------------------------------------------

So basically what you're saying Bob is......."I've pissed off everyone in the Pacers oranization and the next forum party isn't until Novemeber so I can't get any real information. I'm too lazy to do the footwork or make the phone calls so please will someone else help me out".

Fixed. :D

rexnom
07-25-2006, 12:27 PM
Funny thing Roy is I haven't seen anyone complain when Wells put's down the hammer. Why? Because Wells knows something about the team.....

Yeah, I actually really like Wells. I think he is a very solid writer. He is a beat reporter but yet infuses it with nice commentary. He does a similar job to Marc Stein at espn.com. I like it. Kravitz's job is to cause controversy. I guess I should really applaud him because, once again, he has succeeded.

Bball
07-25-2006, 12:28 PM
After re-reading the column in the ink version I find it even harder to argue with. We're a lot closer to be a lock for the lottery than we are to being a lock for the playoffs... at this time.

Also, the title of the piece didn't do it any favors (and that's typically not the writer's doing). It should've been titled "Is this it?" or "Tell me there's more to come" or something along those lines.

But in any case... it's always interesting to see the Warriors come out when Walsh is critisized. And they go after the messenger rather than the message too...

-Bball

tdubb03
07-25-2006, 12:31 PM
If we get Oden then Danger's moving to 2 guard and Quis is a full-time 1.

That's how likely it is we get anywhere near Greg Oden.

grace
07-25-2006, 12:32 PM
The PG situation is a bit worrisome...well, ok, VERY worrisome. But lottery? Come on...

If everyone else (except ATL and NY) is better than last year then the Pacers probably are in the lottery.

Let's say by some chance they do make the playoffs. They aren't making it out of the first round. I think someone at the party said he thought being in the lottery would be better than losing in the first round.

tdubb03
07-25-2006, 12:35 PM
The difference between 1st round playoff exit and the lottery in any given season is 1 regular season win, give or take.

Bball
07-25-2006, 12:36 PM
Please. I don't care if you're Bball's jaded, cynical Uncle, you know damn well we're not missing the playoffs with the team we'll have post-Al trade.


If the playoffs are in jeopardy then Walsh would make some kind of move near the trade deadline in a last gasp effort to not miss the playoffs. So, it's hard to say that we won't make the playoffs. ...even if the best thing would probably be to miss them and start thinking about the future.

(If that would happen: )
What good is a patchwork team limping into the playoffs and fighting for the 8th spot... or backing into the playoffs in the first place?

-Bball

RWB
07-25-2006, 12:36 PM
Kravitz's job is to cause controversy. I guess I should really applaud him because, once again, he has succeeded.

Has he really? I don't mean to sound like a wise guy because others have posted the same. I disagree because.....unless someone tells me they pick up the Indy Star because they enjoy reading Kravitz, or they now have a subscription because of Bob Kravitz then I can't see where he has succeeded other than to fillup space in the paper.


Edited...because of brain damage.....
Man I really need to think before I post.....Yes Rexnom, Kravitz does cause a stink. My original point was he doesn't matter enough for the Star to put up with it unless he is selling papers. In that I doubt his wonderful articles cause people to pick up the paper.

JayRedd
07-25-2006, 12:44 PM
This is precisely the point I was attempting to make earlier about the PG depth chart as of now. I find this a serious situation.

I think our best-case ceiling right now would be like #5 seed EC. So if the scenario DK describes above plays out, (And why wouldn't it given Tins's injury history?) we could feasibly back right into the lottery.

The most important aspect of a successful team IMO is stability/leadership/performance at the point. Arguably, we've got decent depth and talent at the other positions. But with your glaring weakness at PG, it's hard to hide it.

And if we had, say, Andre Miller or Mike James or any of the other names people have tossed around in the past few months, where is our ceiling? Four-seed in the playoffs?

Unless we bring a Top 5 or so PG in here, I still don't see us winning the Central or making it out of the 2nd Round.

My only point is that, yes, the PG position is tenuous at best. But assuming Tinsley goes down (which I'd gauge is a 60+% chance) and we have to use filler for the rest of the season (e.g., Saras, Armstrong, Quis, Greene or marginal PG we make a trade for) it's not exactly like we're breaking up the Beatles.

It's the difference between being a slightly above average NBA team and being a slightly below average team. We're not going to be great or terrible either way.

We need to think long term on this. And AJ couldn't have possibly had anything to do with the long term.

Anthem
07-25-2006, 12:44 PM
That said, I don't believe he watches enough of the Pacers/NBA to really be an expert when he writes about them; alas, I believe that's part of what goes in to being a professional columnist. You don't always have the time or energy to watch all the events and then be expected to be an expert on all of them.
Poor guy! He has to write a column EVERY WEEK!

Good thing he never watches games, talks to Pacer players, or talks to the Pacers brass. Can you imagine how much time that would take?

grace
07-25-2006, 12:44 PM
Yeah....it's a little unfair to expect a sportswriter to actually watch the sports he/she writes about. :rolleyes:

I think Bill Benner was the last columnist The Star had who actually watched more than one sport.

JayRedd
07-25-2006, 12:48 PM
I think Bill Benner was the last columnist The Star had who actually watched more than one sport.

And I thought New York's sportswriters were bad....I really believe it's gotten to the point where, aside from inside sources and getting "scoops", the average serious poster on a basketball message board has a better understanding of the League and their team than most of these paid "writers".

grace
07-25-2006, 12:51 PM
Poor guy! He has to write a column EVERY WEEK!

Good thing he never watches games, talks to Pacer players, or talks to the Pacers brass. Can you imagine how much time that would take?

Well in :kravitz: defense (someone shoot me now) he has had some heart trouble lately. I don't think watching the Pacers play is part of his new heart healthy diet.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 01:14 PM
Okay. I started doing the whole "message board" thing when that season's training camp started. So I don't remember what I predicted but I was optimistic enough to pick up a bad, time-consuming habit of hanging out on-line with all of you guys.
It'd be interesting to go back and see how certain you were of the team's chances then.

http://realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=170799&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=36

56 wins. We beat either the Pistons or the Nets in the ECFs, and face the Lakers in the finals. I'd rather it be the Spurs, but something tells me the Lakers are going to be monsters. By then, we will have made some adjustments. NBC, or whoever has the finals, will bill it as "The Rematch" and the Pacers shock everyone by winning it in 7. If it is the Spurs, we win it in 6. We become "a team of destiny." You know, all the hackneyed clichés sportswriters use to bump ratings.


I've got a pretty good feeling about this season as well. Bookmark it. ;)



Then I'll need to double-check the definition of "If." I thought I was talking about the hypothetical compound possibility that (god-forbid) there are no more roster changes and our competitors staying healthy. Both of which are admittedly likely to be untrue.
You know good and well it's the last part of that statement that we're talking about. You stated with certainty that if the roster is locked in stone today and our competitors stay healthy, this team will be in a competitive battle for the last playoff spot. And I'm saying even if those two things hold true, you don't know.

BillS
07-25-2006, 01:19 PM
The difference between 1st round playoff exit and the lottery in any given season is 1 regular season win, give or take.

It's not so much his implication that we are a guaranteed lottery team as it is his statement that we "will not only make the lottery, but get a bunch of ping-pong balls."

Missing the playoffs is a lot different from being one of the very worst teams in the league.

I think unless we were able to trade Tinsley and Jax for Wade and Nash it would not have been considered successful.

Interesting how every move by every other team is seen as being positive, while every move by the Pacers is negative.

Dr. Goldfoot
07-25-2006, 01:39 PM
Even if the Al deal goes thru, they haven't really made the team better with the moves they've made. We've lost Peja, Freddie, A.J., Crosh, Gill, and Pollard. We've added Daniels, Armstrong, drafted two rookies and a TE. Orion Greene, Marshall, Powell and the rest of the summer leaguers haven't actually made the team as of yet.

I'll leave Gill & Pollard out of the equation.

Daniels hasn't proven to be worth anything yet.. He's a reserve who's stats mirror Freddie Jones. He's missed 68 games over the last three years.

Armstrong is old. He should be retired. He was only signed to facilitate this deal.

Shawne Williams isn't ready to contribute.

James White looked good in the summer league, but so did Harrison last year. He's a rookie.

If we get Al I guess he comparable to Peja. He can rebound and score. He's not a superstar player but he's a starter on the majority of teams.

I don't think Daniels + Armstrong + Two Rooks & a TE = Peja, Freddie, AJ & Crosh

At best we get Al and it's all a wash. Not better not worse. At least not this year.

jjbjjbjjb
07-25-2006, 01:43 PM
Fred wanted to start when we have one guy that's more talented offensively and defensively at about the same age while being more reliable, less injury-prone, and much more versatile with the same shot-selection problems (Jack), one guy who is more talented offensively and defensively, younger, more versatile and has TONS more potential (Marquis), and one guy who needs the time to develop because he is oozing potential (Flight). Are you telling me Freddie would go ahead of those three guys on any depth chart? He is perfect for an undermanned team or a poor team because he needs 10+ shots to be effective. We saw more 3-10 nights out of Freddie than 3-5, and I know we can get better out of our number one sixth man.

Write this down: When Freddie is starting or getting big minutes next year for Toronto, there will be tons of griping about what a mistake it was to let him go, just like with JJ in Phoenix this year.

Hicks
07-25-2006, 01:49 PM
If the rosters were locked in stone today and our competitors stayed healthy, this team would be in a competitive battle for the last playoff spot.

I just can't take this seriously, I'm sorry. Pessimism annoys me as much as blind optimism does.

CableKC
07-25-2006, 01:54 PM
I think this article is a couple of weeks premature...again. He points out the obvious moves that makes no sense....like trading AJ for pretty much nothing more then a "babysitter"....like letting Freddie go ( which actually makes sense given the platoon of Guards that we now have ) and doing all this while Tinsley "cashes another paycheck".

My hope is that once Harrington gets moved...it will allow them to make more moves to clear up the PG situation....whether it changes again ( by moving Tinsley or Sarunas )...or if it remains the same. Same goes for SJax.....for now it looks like he stays....but I'm concerned about what it will mean for players like White and where it would place Marquis and Granger in the lineup.

Either way......its unfair to judge what the Pacers are doing until we get a better understanding of whether there will be any additional moves once Harrington gets traded.

shockedandchagrined
07-25-2006, 01:54 PM
After re-reading the column in the ink version I find it even harder to argue with. We're a lot closer to be a lock for the lottery than we are to being a lock for the playoffs... at this time.

Also, the title of the piece didn't do it any favors (and that's typically not the writer's doing). It should've been titled "Is this it?" or "Tell me there's more to come" or something along those lines.

But in any case... it's always interesting to see the Warriors come out when Walsh is critisized. And they go after the messenger rather than the message too...

-Bball

What is your precedent for thinking that the Pacers are closer to the lottery than the playoffs?

The Pacers last year, despite the litany of adversity they faced yet again -

Artest sabotaging another season
Reggie Miller leaving a leadership void (that does take longer than a single season to fill)
JO missing half the season
Tinsley missing half the season
Croshere missing 30 games
Foster missing 20 games
Fred Jones missing 15 games (and getting hurt right at the time when he was playing as well as he ever had)

...and despite this, they still made the playoffs. Chicago and Milwaukee couldn't even muster a better record even though they basically had adversity-free seasons. Washington was just one game better and New Jersey was hardley a juggernaut, considering they were down 2-1 at one point in their first round series with Indiana.

I'm not here to argue that just making the playoffs is satisfying. I'm not here to argue that Walsh/Bird are blameless for believing too long in Artest (or Jonathan Bender for that matter). I'm not here to argue that every thing is peachy keen in Pacer land. But to suggest that the Pacers as configured right this moment (assuming the addition of Harrington) are closer to a lock for the lottery than the playoffs is simply not objective.

If the Pacers experience another season injury/controversy-wise like last year then they will struggle for sure, just like basically every single team in the NBA would. No amount of talent or chemistry can fight through that kind of adversity day after day (and in the Pacers case year after year) and still legitimately aspire to contend for a championship. But they CAN contend for a playoff spot for crying out loud. The evidence is in the last two seasons.

What's your precedent for lottery-land, simply that Jones, Johnson and Croshere are irreplaceable? To me the loss of Reggie Miller was more detrimental than those three combined, and yet as stated above, the Pacers still made the playoffs.

rexnom
07-25-2006, 01:56 PM
Write this down: When Freddie is starting or getting big minutes next year for Toronto, there will be tons of griping about what a mistake it was to let him go, just like with JJ in Phoenix this year.
Of course there will be griping. But if Fred puts up 15ppg while shooting 40% on that team, will it shock anyone? I mean, they traded Charlie V. and lost Mike James. Their shots have to come from somewhere and Chris Bosh isn't a a volume scorer. Freddie will gladly fill that void. Doesn't mean that he would have been effective here or helped us win games.

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 01:57 PM
You know good and well it's the last part of that statement that we're talking about. You stated with certainty that if the roster is locked in stone today and our competitors stay healthy, this team will be in a competitive battle for the last playoff spot. And I'm saying even if those two things hold true, you don't know.

Well, that's why they play the games.

I don't see why that invalidates the entire premise of making projections based on the team as it currently stands.

Chauncey
07-25-2006, 02:02 PM
.

Everybody agreed when Anthony Johnson said after the Pacers' season-ending loss to New Jersey that they needed to change the "culture" of the locker room. And yet, I'm looking at these moves so far, and I see Indiana dealing away all of their best locker room citizens, leaving the knuckleheads behind.

.

No one can argue this point.

Bball
07-25-2006, 02:05 PM
What is your precedent for thinking that the Pacers are closer to the lottery than the playoffs?



The impetus for that thought is this:
Carlisle lost the team last season. The core of the team is still here. And as of this moment it would appear Carlisle is a lame duck coach which just makes things worse.

Secondarily... I am not a believer in the overused "JO Ball" because it exposes one of his biggest weaknesses and is a chemistry killer in and of itself. And yet Coach Carlisle has shown he won't (can't?) get away from it.

And I think some of the team lost a lot of faith in JO last season and I doubt I'm alone in that thought... Keeping Carlisle doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling that will change for the better as long as those two are paired together (barring a change in either one of them).

I'm also a believer that 'losing breeds losing' just as 'winning breeds winning'. I'm not convinced this team knows how to win any longer. When it gets to crunch time, we could be in trouble closing out games. Moreso than last year.
-

Right now we're left hoping Armstrong and Harrington changes the mood of the lockerroom and the bench.... and that Tinsley cannot only stay healthy but also find some newfound 'team oneness' in his heart.

That core (I include Carlisle as part of the core) needs busted up so we can get on with a true rebuilding process and throw away the stupid spin phrases like "restoration process". Rehabilitation process is more like it...

-Bball

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 02:07 PM
Even if the Al deal goes thru, they haven't really made the team better with the moves they've made. We've lost Peja, Freddie, A.J., Crosh, Gill, and Pollard. We've added Daniels, Armstrong, drafted two rookies and a TE. Orion Greene, Marshall, Powell and the rest of the summer leaguers haven't actually made the team as of yet.

I'll leave Gill & Pollard out of the equation.

Daniels hasn't proven to be worth anything yet.. He's a reserve who's stats mirror Freddie Jones. He's missed 68 games over the last three years.

Armstrong is old. He should be retired. He was only signed to facilitate this deal.

Shawne Williams isn't ready to contribute.

James White looked good in the summer league, but so did Harrison last year. He's a rookie.

If we get Al I guess he comparable to Peja. He can rebound and score. He's not a superstar player but he's a starter on the majority of teams.

I don't think Daniels + Armstrong + Two Rooks & a TE = Peja, Freddie, AJ & Crosh

At best we get Al and it's all a wash. Not better not worse. At least not this year.
You are underrating Daniels and not thinking about this in terms of how it fits our team.

Al and Peja are the same caliber of player, but Al can play PF. Instead of having JO and Peja starting with Danny stuck behind them, you can now start JO, Al, AND give Danny the 30 minutes he deserves. That's a tremendous improvement.

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 02:07 PM
I just can't take this seriously, I'm sorry. Pessimism annoys me as much as blind optimism does.

That's not pessimism, that's reality.

Last season, a grand total of six game separated the #5 through #10 spots. We were only three losses from the lottery in the #6 spot. We were a lot closer to #10 than #4. By all indications, its going to be a close race for those six teams (and maybe Boston, too) again.

Again, I like most of the moves we've made this summer on a long-term basis. But I'm not sure how well they'll play out next season. As just one example, chemistry takes time, and if the players think Ricky C. is in lame-duck status they probably won't be in any hurry to resolve the chemistry issues - they'll be too busy proving to management/ other teams/ whomever that they're worthy of being part of somebody's plan somewhere. And that breeds selfish play.

The most important move for fixing the "culture" of the team is the move we're not going to make. And if the alleged "bad apples" are still here (and right now they are and we've heard no rumours about a SJax trade and allegedly they've resigned themself to Tinsley being the opening-day starter at PG (which I'm fine with, but I wish it would be for a different coach)), it could be disasterous.

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 02:10 PM
No one can argue this point.

Actually you can. Fred was not dealt away, he left on his own.

;)

ABADays
07-25-2006, 02:22 PM
As long as there is an Atlantic Division we won't be in the lottery. Where will we be in the Central?

And can we . . . just for a while . . . get off this IF TINSLEY. Man, talk about free passes.

jjbjjbjjb
07-25-2006, 02:25 PM
Of course there will be griping. But if Fred puts up 15ppg while shooting 40% on that team, will it shock anyone? I mean, they traded Charlie V. and lost Mike James. Their shots have to come from somewhere and Chris Bosh isn't a a volume scorer. Freddie will gladly fill that void. Doesn't mean that he would have been effective here or helped us win games.

Oh, I completely agree with you. I just wanted to add my stunning prediction of future griping. :smartass:

DisplacedKnick
07-25-2006, 02:28 PM
What's your precedent for lottery-land, simply that Jones, Johnson and Croshere are irreplaceable? To me the loss of Reggie Miller was more detrimental than those three combined, and yet as stated above, the Pacers still made the playoffs.

If Jamal Tinsley plays his usual 50 games next season then yes, Anthony Johnson is irreplacable. Well, unless Saras suddenly becomes a quick, above average ballhandler who is able to defend NBA players.

edit: missed this.


And can we . . . just for a while . . . get off this IF TINSLEY.

Sorry - I'll fix it:

WHEN Jamal Tinsley plays his usual 50 games next season then yes, Anthony Johnson is irreplacable.

Hicks
07-25-2006, 02:29 PM
No one can argue this point.

It's a true point, however at the same time we're bringing in two stronger lockerrom presences / leaders than we ever had last year in Armstron and Harrington.

DisplacedKnick
07-25-2006, 02:30 PM
Actually you can. Fred was not dealt away, he left on his own.

;)

Well, being as the Pacers withdrew their QO I kind of consider him as being shoved out the door.

Hicks
07-25-2006, 02:31 PM
That's not pessimism, that's reality.

This roster is better than fighting for the 8th seed. That's not reality.

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 02:31 PM
Well, being as the Pacers withdrew their QO I kind of consider him as being shoved out the door.

Maybe they withdrew after he made it clear that he wasn't coming back...

DisplacedKnick
07-25-2006, 02:33 PM
Maybe they withdrew after he made it clear that he wasn't coming back...

If the Pacers made him a QO he had no choice unless someone was about to offer him over 5 million per.

And in either case, why withdraw it? To save Toronto money?

Naptown_Seth
07-25-2006, 02:35 PM
I think Bill Benner was the last columnist The Star had who actually watched more than one sport.
I saw Robin Miller sleeping at a Pacers game once. :)


I've said it a endless times, Kravitz should pull out the Bob Collins archives and learn how a great writer does sports opinion at a high caliber level. Bob has the craft of Woody Paige, ie none. He is a reason that I DON'T BUY the paper, except for the race (500, USGP) versions and perhaps to save a memorable Pacers headline/moment.


You want real Pacers opinions then go with the guys who have been watching them daily for years - Montieth, Bruno, Boyle. Heck, Kellogg doesn't get to follow them that closely and he knows better than Bob, and he knows the NCAA game better too.

CableKC
07-25-2006, 02:38 PM
Write this down: When Freddie is starting or getting big minutes next year for Toronto, there will be tons of griping about what a mistake it was to let him go, just like with JJ in Phoenix this year.

I don't like that we gave up nothing for him....but I don't seem to recall too many people complaining about what a mistake it was to let JJ go. :shrug:

Naptown_Seth
07-25-2006, 02:43 PM
This roster is better than fighting for the 8th seed. That's not reality.
Lock and archive baby! :)

I'll take my lumps if this team struggles and let the pessimists say "I told you so", and if it goes otherwise it will make it easier for me to set my "tune out" filter. :notlisten

Lottery talk is a joke. It's still RC and he didn't have this much talent his first year in Detroit. It's still a 5 time AS PF in his prime years.

AC, AJ, Peja part time, and Fred Jones are what kept the Pacers in the playoff hunt last year and they did it that much better than Daniels, Harrington, White, Greene, Armstrong and Shawne can this year?

I liked to root for the players that left (well Peja was iffy always to me), but I'm not stupid. AC missed a month right in the prime part of the stretch run. AJ hardly played the first month. Fred busted his finger and lost his shot.

Come on already. Okay, they kept Jack and Tins and they are gangsta outlaws on the prowl for murder. The team still won 41 anyway, and now they have replacements for several of the less healthy players from the last 2 years.

People that can't tell the difference between the feeling they get when facing a 45 win season when they want 55 wins and the feeling when they know they will be watching the Hawks or Knicks all season are a joke.


How about some maturity here, instead of pouting (ironically, this is their exact complaint about the Pacers behavior).

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 03:14 PM
That core (I include Carlisle as part of the core) needs busted up so we can get on with a true rebuilding process and throw away the stupid spin phrases like "restoration process". Rehabilitation process is more like it...l

Restoration is stupid, but rehabilitation isn't. Okay.

And I'll put money on it that where we end up will be closer to where I think it will be than where you and Kravitz think it will be. Talk is cheap.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 03:24 PM
Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt.

There you go with your definitive statements again.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 03:30 PM
No one can argue this point.

It's a true point, however at the same time we're bringing in two stronger lockerrom presences / leaders than we ever had last year in Armstrong and Harrington.

That's not necessarily a true point. Who in the organization or on the team has come forward and said Tinsley and Jackson are the sources of all our chemistry woes? As far as I know, that's all been speculation.

grace
07-25-2006, 03:47 PM
As long as there is an Atlantic Division we won't be in the lottery. Where will we be in the Central?

I'll answer the second question first. The Pacers will finish LAST in the Central.

As for who gets the last playoff spot it's going to come down to Indiana and Orlando or whoever finishes second in the Atlantic.

arenn
07-25-2006, 03:48 PM
You can debate whether or not Indiana is a lottery team, but the part of the article that is spot on is that the Pacers have traded away or lost the people who seemed to have the best attitude and kept the ones who are the problems. The elephant in the room in Stephen Jackson. That guy has got to go.

Will Galen
07-25-2006, 03:51 PM
You shouldn't . . . really you shouldn't do it Will . . . don't do it . . . ah what the heck!

I quit reading around post 50 because certain veteran posters known here after as 'Pavlov's Dogs' are taking the same sides they always do, mainly it boils down to pro-management, versus anti-management.

My question is what is it about you guys that you argue the same points with the same people over and over again? Both sides are waisting their time and know it yet they do it anyway. (shaking head)

Ivan Pavlov won the 1904 noble prize in medicine and physiology for his work on the digestive system, although a lot of people best know him for his work 'Pavlov's Dogs'. These experiments were started after Pavlov observed that the dogs in his digestive experiments began to salivate before they were feed. The dogs would salivate at the mere sight of food or at just about any other stimulus that was paired often enough with the food often enough. Pavlov then carried out further expeirments to study this finding further, this gave a huge part of his concept of Classical Conditioning. By pairing the sound of a buzzer(conditioned stimulus) and food(uncontrolled stimulus) and the dogs would respond with salivation(unconditioned response), Pavlov had his experiment. The experiment showed that the sound of the buzzer could make the dogs salivate and that then makes salivation a conditioned response.

(giggle, giggle, snort)

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 03:53 PM
There you go with your definitive statements again.

Do I have to type out a disclaimor on everything? Of course that's just my opinion. I can re-write everything with enough disclaimors on it that at the end of the day I haven't really said anything. That's what I do for a living.

I think its obvious that I'm just stating my opinion, nothing more.

grace
07-25-2006, 03:59 PM
Do I have to type out a disclaimor on everything? Of course that's just my opinion. I can re-write everything with enough disclaimors on it that at the end of the day I haven't really said anything. That's what I do for a living.

I think its obvious that I'm just stating my opinion, nothing more.

Just change your sig to JMO.

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 04:02 PM
Do I have to type out a disclaimor on everything? Of course that's just my opinion. I can re-write everything with enough disclaimors on it that at the end of the day I haven't really said anything. That's what I do for a living.

I think its obvious that I'm just stating my opinion, nothing more.

It's not obvious.

It's no wonder you like Kravitz's writing.

"Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt."

Stated as a fact.

"Right now, I think our backcourt is a lottery backcourt."

Stated as a personal opinion.

It's a subtle, but big difference. Ever hear what Hemingway once said about writing: The difference between the right word and almost the right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.

grace
07-25-2006, 04:04 PM
My question is what is it about you guys that you argue the same points with the same people over and over again? Both sides are waisting their time and know it yet they do it anyway. (shaking head)

Some people just haven't learned the art of :ignore:

Next time you feel the urge to argue just :trashcan:

grace's :ignore: list: 37 strong! :trashshake:

aceace
07-25-2006, 04:12 PM
I thought about breaking down Krapitzs article and answering some of his points but all of you have pretty much addressed them. So i'll just say it "Krapitz is an idiot" why read his Krap.

I will say this.

While Armstrong is certainly past his better days, we didn't bring him here to score. He was brought here to get the ball up the floor (which he can) and get it to the guys who could score. His defense is still good. I like AJ but you make moves to win championships and AJ IMHO cannot lead a team to a championship as the starter. He is a combo guard. Armstrong can fill AJs shoes just fine and possibly be more effective as a leader. Quis will have a long career and was a good player stuck behind some very good players. Croshere has not improved since 2000, you know what your going to get with him. Quis could have a breakout year (lets hope). Tinsley played 80 and 72 games his first 2 years, he could easily do that again. Al is better and more mature and will be a great addition. Krapitzs is completely washed up and should retire. His shot doesn't even draw iron anymore.

naptown
07-25-2006, 04:16 PM
I dont even bothering reading Boob Krapitz anymore. Haven't for at least a year now. The guy is nothing more than a troll. He is the primary reason I quit taking the paper.

Unclebuck
07-25-2006, 04:19 PM
Would anyone else be surprised if Marquis Daniels is our starting point guard

bulldog
07-25-2006, 04:24 PM
Would anyone else be surprised if Marquis Daniels is our starting point guard

Me.

A) Doesn't seem like a Carslisle type of move.

B) Not sure if he's ready to handle that kind of a load, it's a big leap to be the primary ball-handler. I think he'd have trouble getting it up the floor and handling pressure from smaller, quicker players. We saw how devestating that can be with Runi.



While Armstrong is certainly past his better days, we didn't bring him here to score. He was brought here to get the ball up the floor (which he can) and get it to the guys who could score. His defense is still good. I like AJ but you make moves to win championships and AJ IMHO cannot lead a team to a championship as the starter.

Fine, but couldn't the deal have made a little more sense? Couldn't we have gotten more pieces back that would lead us toward a championship? Will any of these guys be on the roster when we're ready to contend?

bulletproof
07-25-2006, 04:29 PM
Would anyone else be surprised if Marquis Daniels is our starting point guard

No.

Unclebuck
07-25-2006, 04:30 PM
Kravitz is on ESPN 950 in the 5:00 hour

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 05:04 PM
Just change your sig to JMO.

Thanks for the suggestion. Read the fine print.

:signit:

EDIT - GRACE ISN'T IGNORING ME!! :woot2:

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 05:45 PM
Oh, she could ignore me without using the ignore feature. :buddies:

vapacersfan
07-25-2006, 06:03 PM
Oh, she could ignore me without using the ignore feature. :buddies:

That is easier said then done, trust me ;)






















:-p

Doug in CO
07-25-2006, 08:51 PM
It's not obvious.

It's no wonder you like Kravitz's writing.

"Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt."

Stated as a fact.

"Right now, I think our backcourt is a lottery backcourt."

Stated as a personal opinion.

It's a subtle, but big difference. Ever hear what Hemingway once said about writing: The difference between the right word and almost the right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.

Hmmm... I wonder if BP has ever taken a writing course.

Here is one basic premise - when you are writing - and talking in the first person - you are stating an opinion.

That is why when you look at GOOD writers - you never see them put a disclaimer "in my opinion... blah blah blah"

Where is Anthem when I need him.

Fortunately (Unfortunately actually) I was in meeting hell all day and am just catching up... but in short, big shock, I agree with Bball and Jay.

Now as far as Bob - he is NOT A JOURNALIST PEOPLE. His job is to play devil's advocate, give a side that is usually not provided, make people think... and sometimes even make them mad.

To quote the STAR: Bob Kravitz is a columnist for The Indianapolis Star.

Interesting that with 100 plus posts here Rim is the only other one that gets this - his role. He is - of course - from New York (who are clamoring to trade ARod but that is another story).

One fact that people need to remember - while he writes his columns, he does not write his headlines.

ARTESTINMYHEART
07-25-2006, 08:54 PM
The star also says Krapitz is a Newswriter, not just a columnist. Krapitz is a disgusting piece of Indiana. The only reason national outlets wants him when he talks bad about the home team. He truly is a disgrace.

Naptown_Seth
07-26-2006, 12:24 AM
To quote the STAR: Bob Kravitz is a columnist for The Indianapolis Star.
As I said in another thread about Bob K - SO WAS BOB COLLINS.

One was a great writer, the other gets by with outrageous topics.

In other words, Johnny Knoxville is NOT Lenny Bruce. There is more to it than just shocking people or being outrageous.

Kravitz writes like a message board troll. His patterns are similar and certainly his outlandish exagerations and wildly inaccurate predictions are too. The dude was RIPPING the Colts before the 15-1 season, and by mid-year he was magically seeing all these good qualities that he missed just a few months before.

Same old, same old. Columnists write opinions. Good columnists write well-formed and knowledge based opinions and give you interest where you might not have expected to have it. They make the interesting into gripping, they make the common into sublime, they draw you in and convince you rather than rile you up.

Kravitz once wrote regarding the NCAA Final Women's Final 4 being in Indy that he couldn't keep your interest with such an article. In other words he admitted that he doesn't have the chops to write sports.

Collins could tell you his opinion of a water polo match and you'd be thinking it might be time to go watch one of those and wonder why you had been stupid enough to skip them before then.


Well thought, well written, interesting opinion >>>>> controversial opinion

naptown
07-26-2006, 12:27 AM
Outstanding Seth!!!

3Ball
07-26-2006, 01:20 AM
Would anyone else be surprised if Marquis Daniels is our starting point guard
I wouldn't be surprised at all, and unless we bring in someone else, it probably makes the most sense. All this talk of being deep at point guard is only true in the sense that we have a number of possible backups. Unless Orien or Runi has taken a major step forward, and unless Tins stays healthy, I think it will be Quis starting by February.

Hicks
07-26-2006, 01:33 AM
Seth just put Kravitz in his place! :bowdown:

Bball
07-26-2006, 01:40 AM
Pretty soon you guys will be clamoring for the return of 'the Old Scout'...

-Bball

bulletproof
07-26-2006, 03:33 AM
Hmmm... I wonder if BP has ever taken a writing course.
Hmm...I wonder if DinO knows what good writing is. Probably thinks you should never start a sentence with "and" or "but" or end a sentence in a preposition.


Here is one basic premise - when you are writing - and talking in the first person - you are stating an opinion.
I've never seen that rule.


That is why when you look at GOOD writers - you never see them put a disclaimer "in my opinion... blah blah blah"
More rules. Any good artist/writer knows that rules are meant to be broken.

I'm curious (fragment). Who do you think is a GOOD writer?


Where is Anthem when I need him.
Why do you need Anthem? Is he going to give me a writing lesson?

AesopRockOn
07-26-2006, 03:50 AM
Wait, we're going to finish behind the BUcks? We should be higher than 8.

RWB
07-26-2006, 07:26 AM
Now as far as Bob - he is NOT A JOURNALIST PEOPLE. His job is to play devil's advocate, give a side that is usually not provided, make people think... and sometimes even make them mad.

To quote the STAR: Bob Kravitz is a columnist for The Indianapolis Star.
.


To quote the STAR

http://blogs.indystar.com/coltsinsider/

The Star's Colts reporters - Bob Kravitz, Phillip B. Wilson, Mike Chappell and Phil Richards -- weigh in with what's happening in Coltsland. :devil:

D-BONE
07-26-2006, 09:04 AM
And if we had, say, Andre Miller or Mike James or any of the other names people have tossed around in the past few months, where is our ceiling? Four-seed in the playoffs?

Unless we bring a Top 5 or so PG in here, I still don't see us winning the Central or making it out of the 2nd Round.

My only point is that, yes, the PG position is tenuous at best. But assuming Tinsley goes down (which I'd gauge is a 60+% chance) and we have to use filler for the rest of the season (e.g., Saras, Armstrong, Quis, Greene or marginal PG we make a trade for) it's not exactly like we're breaking up the Beatles.

It's the difference between being a slightly above average NBA team and being a slightly below average team. We're not going to be great or terrible either way.

We need to think long term on this. And AJ couldn't have possibly had anything to do with the long term.

JR, I see your point. It's sound from a pragmatic standpoint. I was talking more ideally or hypothetically in my post. An EC #5 seed would be the best I can see us achieveing given no more changes post-Al (assuming that ever even gets done).

Joining you in pragmaticville, I actually see it more like we'll be looking at 6-8 seed contention. True, that may be the difference of a relatively small number of wins and losses.

However, if you put a Mike James, or even more so a Dre Miller, with our moves this offseason, then I think you're talking about a serious top 3-4 EC shot. To me, that's a significant difference than fighting for a bottom tier playoff spot. Perhaps, with a some luck, you're even in the ECF.

Of course, that veers back into big time hypotheticals as James is off the market and I don't expect to see Miller or any PG of his calibur coming on board. So, again, I agree that it's best to see this "restoration" as something ongoing that won't be resolved overnight.

Doesn't change the fact that relying on JT to be both good and healthy is a risky proposition. That is being pragmatic I think.

D-BONE
07-26-2006, 09:16 AM
Would anyone else be surprised if Marquis Daniels is our starting point guard

Depends on how RC arrives at the decision.

If it's due to Tins going down for whatever reason, not so much.

If RC demotes JT/Saras in favor of Quis opening the season, I would be shocked, but pleasantly surprised b/c, as I've stated before, my confidence and patience with JT and Saras are extremely low.

In the above scenario Saras would be the backup, which I think is what he's best suited for (although he certainly needs to show marked improvement to do well there) and JT would essentially be out of the picture all together.

Of course, I'm not sure Daniels truly has the requisite skills to be the full-time PG. Therefore, I am not holding my breath that anything like this will occur.

grace
07-26-2006, 12:36 PM
To quote the STAR

http://blogs.indystar.com/coltsinsider/

The Star's Colts reporters - Bob Kravitz, Phillip B. Wilson, Mike Chappell and Phil Richards -- weigh in with what's happening in Coltsland. :devil:

There you go expecting accuracy from The Star when all it's really good for is a place for your dog to relieve himself.

bulletproof
08-24-2006, 09:32 AM
:bump:


Another fun read.

Fool
08-24-2006, 09:46 AM
You can state facts in first person.

Naptown_Seth
08-24-2006, 10:55 AM
So is Chad Ford a journalist or columnist?

And since when did Ford become a homer? Or is it simply that BK goes out of his way to be the anti-homer, to look for the most negative angle he can find, and does it so much that people on the outside without a vested interest actually look like homers?

ChicagoJ
08-24-2006, 11:04 AM
So is Chad Ford a journalist or columnist?

And since when did Ford become a homer? Or is it simply that BK goes out of his way to be the anti-homer, to look for the most negative angle he can find, and does it so much that people on the outside without a vested interest actually look like homers?

Neither - for the longest time he was a guy with a computer program that would scan the internet for sports articles and then he would summarize/ paraphrase them for SportsTalk.com/ NBATalk.com.

They struck a nerve, ESPN acquired them, and his "articles" started carrying a premium. He was the "outsider" Insider. So, does he magically become either a reporter or columnist just because his employer became ESPN? I don't know. He does apparently get some interviews with insiders now that he didn't get in the past.