PDA

View Full Version : SportingNews.com: Pacers don't fit in new NBA



blanket
08-01-2006, 06:09 PM
Sean Deveney's SportingBlog
http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=113454

Pacers don't fit in new NBA
August 1, 2006

For the past 15 years, the problem for the Pacers has been one of a very good team unable to be great. They've been to the playoffs 16 times since 1990 but played in only one Finals. Heading into last season -- and the season before -- it seemed the Pacers had the talent and the motivation to break that good-but-not-great voodoo. Until, at least, the antics of Ron Artest squashed the hopes of each of the last two Pacers teams before the Christmas shopping season got rolling.

It could be the curse of Zan Tabak. You may remember, Tabak was a little-used center on the Pacers' Finals team in 2000. I remember during a media session after a practice at Conseco Fieldhouse, Biff Henderson, a producer for David Letterman's show, was filming a bit for that night. The Henderson film crew approached Tabak, and Henderson said, on the air, "You know, you're the third seven-foot Croatian named Zan I met today." Now, Tabak played 18 games all season for the Pacers and was not accustomed to interviews. Poor guy. The first one he gets is Biff Henderson. I swear, at that moment, Tabak gave Henderson a look that not only cursed him, but cursed the Pacers, the NBA and the entire sport of basketball. Perhaps that curse on the Pacers stuck.

Entering this year, it looks again like the Pacers will break the good-but-not-great jinx. But that's because this year, I'm not sure this team even qualifies as good.

Thanks to the NBA's new rules interpretation, there's no question that the league is turning to increasingly smaller lineups featuring more versatile players. And, looking at the Pacers' roster, it seems the franchise is stocking up on that type of player. The awaited return of Al Harrington gives them small forward capable of playing power forward. Second-year man Danny Granger will be a solid NBA wing man. Rookies Shawne Williams and James White were high-value picks in this year's draft. Marquis Daniels, acquired in a trade from Dallas, can play three positions.

OK, so the Pacers want to pick up the tempo, and they're building a Phoenix-ish roster. But Indiana is still coached by Rick Carlisle, a guy who prefers the Chinese water torture pace -- you know, drip, drip, drip till you submit. Carlisle is good at coaching that way. He twice won 50 games in Detroit with that method and won 60 games in his first season with Indiana. What makes the Pacers think Carlisle will suddenly morph into Mike D'Antoni? Or that he should?

Perhaps, if you're wondering why Carlisle does not have a contract extension yet, the answer is that Pacers brass can't foresee Carlisle adapting to the new NBA. Maybe the new rules have rendered Carlisle a dinosaur at age 46. I have a hard time imagining Larry Bird firing his friend and protege, but then, once it becomes clear that the Pacers are not so good, Bird is going to need to cover his own rear.

That's because, though the Pacers have added eight players, the changes have been cosmetic and the real work has not been done. This team did not need to trade Austin Croshere or Anthony Johnson or Peja Stojakovic. They were not the problem. Indiana needed to dump Jamaal Tinsley and Stephen Jackson. Or at least one of them. Tinsley has done plenty of damage for the Pacers -- in the locker room. He pouts. He does not practice. He milks injuries. But instead of trading him, the Pacers moved backup Johnson, solidifying Tinsley's spot as the starting point guard. Tinsley missed at least 30 games for the third straight year and, effectively, got a promotion. That sends some kind of locker-room message, eh?

Oh, and, has anyone else wondered how the Pacers plan to run more with Gimps-ley as the starting point guard?

Part of the problem is Bird himself. One of the advantages of having him in the front office was supposed to be his ability to work with players and keep guys in the locker room in line. But two agents I spoke with said Bird is standoffish with his players, and that players don't like playing for him. If there is a solution to the Pacers' locker room troubles, it sure is not coming from Bird. He has always been the tight-lipped type and has a well-earned disdain for the pampering that the modern player requires. But apparently, players feel it would be good for the team if there was a sense that Bird is engaged. "He is very condescending," one agent says.

Even if Bird turns into St. Larry, that won't solve the Pacers' woes. Behind Tinsley are Sarunas Jasikevicius, Darrell Armstrong and Orien Greene. Assuming Tinsley sits out his customary 40 games this year, which of those players would you want to be your starting point guard? I'm going with Armstrong, 38 years old and still ticking.

And if Jermaine O'Neal gets hurt, forget it. Harrington would play the four-spot with, um, Maceo Baston behind him. But that is indicative of where this roster is now. Too many wings, no point guard, no depth up front. At least Pacers fans won't have their high hopes dashed. The best they can hope for this year is so-so.

Shaggy
08-01-2006, 06:19 PM
Wow! Denevey would fit right in on this board. I have read 90+% of his comments from many members of PD. Didn't really get his attempt at Tabak humor. Oh well, not everyone can write like the Sports Guy.

BoomBaby31
08-01-2006, 06:19 PM
We are like phoenix: just without the great shooters, a brillant PG, the chemistry, and quality leader. Oh and a coach that runs an up-tempo O. lol Phoenix is rare, their shooters are absolutely amazing. They would shoot 60% from the field (90% jump shots) and I would be saying at halftime no way they are going to do that 2nd half. Sure enough, there they were shooting 62%. We don't have the right shooters for a phoenix type team. This article is sad but very true. We are so low on quality players, we are depending on the rookies to be major factors in the rotation next year. We need to grab a shooter and a true center before the season starts.

CableKC
08-01-2006, 06:20 PM
It could be the curse of Zan Tabak. You may remember, Tabak was a little-used center on the Pacers' Finals team in 2000. I remember during a media session after a practice at Conseco Fieldhouse, Biff Henderson, a producer for David Letterman's show, was filming a bit for that night. The Henderson film crew approached Tabak, and Henderson said, on the air, "You know, you're the third seven-foot Croatian named Zan I met today." Now, Tabak played 18 games all season for the Pacers and was not accustomed to interviews. Poor guy. The first one he gets is Biff Henderson. I swear, at that moment, Tabak gave Henderson a look that not only cursed him, but cursed the Pacers, the NBA and the entire sport of basketball. Perhaps that curse on the Pacers stuck.

Wait a sec....you mean the blame for all this is becuase of Biff Henderson?

Everything is beginning to make sense now.......:-o

redwillow
08-01-2006, 06:33 PM
One more example of the media underestimating the Pacers. In 5 months it will be..."I knew the Pacers would be good this year all along." It's like Bill Walton announcing a Pacers game when the Pacers are the undergog. He will say how we just don't have what it takes. By the time we've taken an 8 point lead into the half he will be saying we should go deep in the playoffs. The Pacers are the Rodney Dangerfields of the NBA every year.

AnotherBirdCreation
08-01-2006, 06:36 PM
Not a big fan of Deveney or this article. I agree with him that either Jack or Tinsley should be gone, but again, that is easier said than done. I think he is grossly underrating Granger, Harrington, Daniels, and Sarunas. Actually, throw Baston in there as well. And no mention of Foster or Harrison? Has he ever seen the Pacers play? I've said this tons of times, but Rick is a smart guy that will adapt to his personel. People said the same thing about Flip Saunders last year and Brian Billeck when he went to the Ravens. They also said similar things about Dungy when he went to the Colts. It's not like these guys come out of the womb and say, "I'm a defensive-minded coach that can only coach halfcourt teams." I tend to think some of the best coaching jobs happen when a coach balances out his personel.

cramerica
08-01-2006, 06:40 PM
I guess we'll see when the season starts. Not saying he's right or wrong, but I do know that reading that pile of feces made me want to stick rusted nails into my eyes. Only thing I agree with was the part about trading away AJ.

avoidingtheclowns
08-01-2006, 06:49 PM
One more example of the media underestimating the Pacers. In 5 months it will be..."I knew the Pacers would be good this year all along." It's like Bill Walton announcing a Pacers game when the Pacers are the undergog. He will say how we just don't have what it takes. By the time we've taken an 8 point lead into the half he will be saying we should go deep in the playoffs. The Pacers are the Rodney Dangerfields of the NBA every year.

well yeah, but bill walton is a douchebag.

i know that appears to be a personal attack, but it has actually been medically proven. just ask Dr. Jack Ramsey.

Destined4Greatness
08-01-2006, 06:56 PM
He couldn't even get how many wins we had right. Pathetic. Although he like people on this board claim Jackson has to be traded failed to give reasons. But of course he didn't list stupid ones.

Hes an Idiot. He may be right about us being mediocre but he deduced it incorrectly

ABADays
08-01-2006, 06:57 PM
You would think if Tinsley could read at all he would get the idea he needs to clean up his act. He can read right?

indytoad
08-01-2006, 06:58 PM
One more example of the media underestimating the Pacers. In 5 months it will be..."I knew the Pacers would be good this year all along." It's like Bill Walton announcing a Pacers game when the Pacers are the undergog. He will say how we just don't have what it takes. By the time we've taken an 8 point lead into the half he will be saying we should go deep in the playoffs. The Pacers are the Rodney Dangerfields of the NBA every year.

I don't know why everyone always says that. The last couple years we were picked to go much farther than we actually did. Although, it's true this "the media is out to get us" complex isn't limited to Pacers fans - everyone loves to be the underdog, after all.

IndyToad
Neutral fingers

able
08-01-2006, 06:59 PM
shrug, now we know who bball is, or that he is blatanly into plagiarism, or finally closely related. so what else is new ?

grace
08-01-2006, 07:01 PM
Part of the problem is Bird himself. One of the advantages of having him in the front office was supposed to be his ability to work with players and keep guys in the locker room in line. But two agents I spoke with said Bird is standoffish with his players, and that players don't like playing for him. If there is a solution to the Pacers' locker room troubles, it sure is not coming from Bird. He has always been the tight-lipped type and has a well-earned disdain for the pampering that the modern player requires. But apparently, players feel it would be good for the team if there was a sense that Bird is engaged. "He is very condescending," one agent says.


As much as I don't like Bird I can't picture him being condescending to anyone.

And while we're on the subject of agents here's hoping Arn Tellem isn't one of the two agents the guy is talking about. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if he is.

clemdogg
08-01-2006, 07:04 PM
Yea I believe his point in writing this article was to say that we have been good but not great for a long time, but now, we won't even be good. That just isn't true. Assuming we get Al, that will give us at least 3 guys who will average double figures in JO, Al, and Marquis. That isn't even counting Danny or Tins, who are both very capable scorers. I hate to say it, and even more I hate the fact that Larry put us in this position, but I think our season will hinge on how healthy Tins stays.

My point in this rebuttal is that we have enough constants to at least make the playoffs, especially in the East. With Rick coaching and JO staying healthy, put us down for at least 40 wins. Having said all of that, it really isn't very logical right now to suspect that the Pacers will win the championsip next year. I think, at best, we could make, but not win, the Conf Finals. But in order for that to happen, we'd have to get Al, Tins and JO and everyone else would have to stay healthy, Danny would have to have a break out year, and we would have to get some kind of offensive and defensive production from our rookies. But with our lack of shooting, we would have to be really, really good at defense.

tdubb03
08-01-2006, 07:06 PM
I don't think it's a problem with the Pacers not fitting the new NBA. Or Larry Bird not fitting.

It's that the game of basketball doesn't fit in the new NBA.

AesopRockOn
08-01-2006, 07:42 PM
He's completely and totally wrong about the Peja deal. We milked that for all it was worth. Does he even know who we got in the trades and why they occured? Sounds like a hater to me.

Kegboy
08-01-2006, 08:28 PM
I've loved Deveney's work for years. I think he's far and away the best of the internet columnists. And I'd say he's definitely on target here.

Mac_Daddy
08-01-2006, 09:20 PM
I think he should have elaborated more on the "Curse of Zan Tabak." Apparently his face cursed us... Now I know why we never seem to break out and win a championship. Pretty soon, we'll have to start parading this curse around just like the Cubs fans to explain why we can't do anything.




I hate excuses.

Ultimate Frisbee
08-01-2006, 09:38 PM
The thing that I found interesting was the bolded section about Bird...

If thats true, perhaps another backup for Donnie would be a better decision...

Unclebuck
08-02-2006, 09:55 AM
This thing about Bird concerns me a little. Whether right or wrong pro athletes like to be catered to and treated like kings. That might not be right, but it is the way it is.

Doubt Bird would do what John Paxson did here.

/sports/columnists/cs-060802smith,1,7087295.column?coll=cs-home-utility

Paxson as hopeful as he is anxious
GM says he likes new look of Bulls
Sam Smith
On Pro Basketball

August 2, 2006

LAS VEGAS -- It's the little things, we're told, that mean the difference between winning and losing in basketball.

Bulls general manager John Paxson seems to be trying to make sure he doesn't overlook any of them.

Paxson flew here Monday from Chicago to buy dinner for his point guard, Kirk Hinrich, who is here with the USA Basketball team preparing for the World Championships later this month in Japan.

"I was pleased, surprised," Hinrich said. "It shows the kind of guy Pax is. It means a lot. That stuff goes a long way toward showing he's serious about his players and the organization means a lot to him."

The U.S. team was to scrimmage the Puerto Rican team at UNLV's Thomas & Mack Center Tuesday night, but Hinrich's participation was uncertain … thanks to Monday night's dinner.

"I got an allergic reaction to something I ate, maybe in the Caesar salad," he said. "I didn't get much sleep last night."

But Hinrich will recover, and he'll remain one of the key components of a Bulls team that—dare I say it—could be considered a championship contender for the first time since the 1997-98 season.

Paxson has taken the extra steps with the signing of free-agent star Ben Wallace and the drafting of Tyrus Thomas and Thabo Sefolosha, the trade of Tyson Chandler for veteran P.J. Brown and additions like Adrian Griffin, who was a key contributor for the Dallas Mavericks last season.

But the Bulls still look like they're short a big man, and they don't have a true post presence on offense.

"I've put myself out there, but if you do anything [bold] you're on the hook," Paxson said before heading home Tuesday. "One thing I am real comfortable in is Scott [Skiles] has found a way to get a lot out of young players and he's not afraid to throw those guys out on the floor and let them play.

"I think we have depth and versatility and we'll be able to live with some of the mistakes the young guys make and not be afraid to let them play."

As Paxson talked about the Bulls, USA Basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski walked over to compliment him.

"I grew up about a mile and a half from the United Center," Krzyzewski said. "I like the things you've done."

Paxson smiled humbly, though he knows his moves are being questioned.

Did he pay too much for Wallace, who can't make a free throw and gets fouled at the end of games? Did he take a chance on inexperienced players in the draft? Who's going to score in the post when the offense slows? Can you win with all those jump shots?

Paxson has agonized about all that for weeks. He said he's getting ready to head for a remote island with his wife. No TV, no phones, no computers. No golf course. Just lots of blue water and beach. "I've got four or five books I want to read," he said.

None about the Princeton offense or UCLA cuts.

"No doubt, expectations have been raised," Paxson said. "I think we're all anxious to see what we have. I think we improved our team. That's the whole idea behind it.

"People talk about Game 5 in Miami (when the Bulls led by five in the third quarter). We had our chances. We had a number of possessions, Miami didn't score and if we had any offense we would have won that game. It didn't happen. We weren't good enough, which is what it came down to. If you cannot seize the moment, it means you're not good enough."

The Bulls' many changes "haven't disrupted the core of the team," Paxson noted. "As I sit here, I say Miami isn't going away. Detroit, New Jersey, Washington, Cleveland, Milwaukee—those are good basketball teams. But we're excited. The thing I'm happiest about is we have 13 guys on our roster Scott can put in games.

"We've added length. Last year we got so few easy scores. My hope is this year we'll be a better defensive team, get more steals, deflections, things that translate into easy scores, and I think we'll be able to do that."

Post offense is an area Paxson couldn't address in the draft or free agency. Eleven of the first 15 games are on the road, which could be a challenge with so many new players. The home record wasn't good last season, and that's something Paxson said is vital that the Bulls change.

"It's going to be a work in progress," he said. "We did make a lot of changes. It's not just going to happen."

It's possible the Bulls will add another big man. A tough guy like Seattle's Danny Fortson could be released and might be worth a look. Perhaps the Bulls could try for a sign-and-trade for one of the available free agents, like Memphis' Lorenzen Wright, using Chris Duhon. The Bulls have told Michael Sweetney—again—to get in better shape.

"I'm not the most optimistic guy to begin with," Paxson said, acknowledging his changing moods about his team. "But I believe this: Kirk Hinrich will be a better player, I believe Luol Deng and Andres Nocioni will be better players and I think we've added pieces around them that are better than we had. It gives us a dimension we didn't have in length and athleticism. I'm hopeful and I'm anxious.

"I also know how hard it is to win. The great thing is for two years this team has battled. Ben Wallace, ever since the deal, there's been criticism he's aging and we still don't have an [inside] offensive presence. But he's a guy who has never conceded anything and he gets respect when he's out there. Because of that we have to be a better team."

It won't be long before we all get to find out.

sasmith@tribune.com


Copyright © 2006, The Chicago Tribune

Doug in CO
08-02-2006, 10:16 AM
This article sounds a lot like what Kravitz was saying the net result of the season will be

DisplacedKnick
08-02-2006, 10:30 AM
Pretty unremarkable article IMO. Deveny says the Pacers will be just OK this year - unless JO or Tinsley gets hurt and then you'll have big problems. He says the team is trying to make some moves to change the team based on the way they've started calling the games - which they are. He says the Pacers really should move Jackson or Tinsley but they haven't and everything else so far is mostly window dressing - which is basically true. He says there are questions as to whether Carlisle can adjust to an uptempo game and that may be why he doesn't have a contract extension - which is pretty much what this board's been saying. He says Bird's not a touchy-feely kind of guy which everyone on the planet knows.

Based on this article, I'd say Deveney has demonstrated his mastery of the blatantly obvious.

But of course it's an article for everyone who follows basketball - not just Pacer fans. You don't put a lot of detail into that.

Unclebuck
08-02-2006, 10:42 AM
The Bulls' many changes "haven't disrupted the core of the team," Paxson noted. "As I sit here, I say Miami isn't going away. Detroit, New Jersey, Washington, Cleveland, Milwaukee—those are good basketball teams. But we're excited. The thing I'm happiest about is we have 13 guys on our roster Scott can put in games.




Let's see, what team didn't he name.

rexnom
08-02-2006, 10:51 AM
Let's see what team didn't he name.
Yeah...that really hurts. I think we can officially put ourselves into the rebuilding category...and I don't care what Donnie calls it.

McKeyFan
08-02-2006, 11:09 AM
I've loved Deveney's work for years. I think he's far and away the best of the internet columnists. And I'd say he's definitely on target here.

I can't think of another column that better articulates the Pacers' problems. This is a great article, right on the money.

Rimfire complains that he knows everything that was said in the article. I think the real point is that this is the first published article that says these things directly.

Also, the info Bird really is new information: agents saying he is "condescending." Yes, this feeling is probably related to Bird being relationally challenged. It has been my opinion for a while that Bird does not have the same killer instinct with people that he had on the court--those are two very different things. I think you can trace a lot of the Pacers problems to Larry Bird's inability to confront people. He may say something at a press conference, but my guess is he says nothing to the person directly, thus coming off as condescending, rather than "speaking the truth in love."

The writer's point about rewarding the complaining, gimpy Tinsley with the elimination of his chief competition was rather poignant, reflective of our larger problem.

haloguy
08-02-2006, 11:17 AM
HE is probably right, our team is a mess right now.
I have no idea what we are doing

Mourning
08-02-2006, 11:59 AM
I can't think of another column that better articulates the Pacers' problems. This is a great article, right on the money.

Rimfire complains that he knows everything that was said in the article. I think the real point is that this is the first published article that says these things directly.

Also, the info Bird really is new information: agents saying he is "condescending." Yes, this feeling is probably related to Bird being relationally challenged. It has been my opinion for a while that Bird does not have the same killer instinct with people that he had on the court--those are two very different things. I think you can trace a lot of the Pacers problems to Larry Bird's inability to confront people. He may say something at a press conference, but my guess is he says nothing to the person directly, thus coming off as condescending, rather than "speaking the truth in love."

The writer's point about rewarding the complaining, gimpy Tinsley with the elimination of his chief competition was rather poignant, reflective of our larger problem.

:amen:

Robertmto
08-02-2006, 01:29 PM
At least Pax respects us :wizards: fans!

And maybe Bird isn't condescending, but is actually starting to critisize or show "tough love" to players because he knows this roster wouldn't stand a chance against other teams? (last years' Pacers included)

:confused:

Peck
08-03-2006, 02:07 AM
The irony to me is that if Kravitz had written the exact same thing word for word there would be 5 pages worth of complaining about Bob Kravitz. But since it's someone else it is only getting a little bit of notice.

Like I said before, I enjoy the fact that we seem to be for making player movements. However I don't see any indication that we are looking to move the players who I thought really ought to go.

They probably tried with poor trades thrown back at them instead of real offers.

Naptown_Seth
08-03-2006, 02:16 AM
shrug, now we know who bball is, or that he is blatanly into plagiarism, or finally closely related. so what else is new ?
:laugh:


I ripped this article at RATS and didn't feel like repeating it here, figured half the people might have read over there anyway. But the crux of my point was this - how has this team really gotten worse if Harrington is signed?

They ARE NOT trying to be Phoenix and Walsh just said so in his presser, so they aren't "PHX without shooters". They ARE NOT done dealing, per DW and the size of the roster (at the least someone has to be cut), and they DID WIN 41 with Ron/Peja gone for a month, with JO and Tinsley hurt half the year, with AC out more than a month, with Fred in the toilet in the 2nd half due to the broken finger, and with Jack playing every night.

Sure the loss of AJ is devestating (sarcasm), but they have added enough to make up for it I think.

JO and Tinsley will at least be as healthy as last year, Harrington rebounds better than Ron and Peja, plays better defense than Peja, and will likely play the full year rather than sitting a month while demanding a trade.

Oh, and the coach hasn't missed the playoffs yet.


How that all adds up to "they will bomb" is beyond me, and why he compares them to PHX (loser) rather than the more defensive oriented Mavs (Avery), Heat (Riley), Spurs and Pistons is beyond me. They forgot to tell those teams/coaches that defense and grinding it out is dead and won't get you to the Finals.

Not exactly sure what his version of era is, but unless its about 3 months I don't think we are seeing a "new NBA" just yet.

bulletproof
08-03-2006, 05:08 AM
The irony to me is that if Kravitz had written the exact same thing word for word there would be 5 pages worth of complaining about Bob Kravitz. But since it's someone else it is only getting a little bit of notice.

I've been out of town for the past 5 days without internet access, if you're referring to me. I still think it's premature to comment too much about next season. If we go into next season with Tinsley, then I think he will have made a valid point about him, but it would have been more meaningful and resonant had he made it going into the season with Tinsley still on our roster. I don't know, but this article just seems to ring hollow right now.

Unclebuck
08-03-2006, 08:10 AM
The irony to me is that if Kravitz had written the exact same thing word for word there would be 5 pages worth of complaining about Bob Kravitz. But since it's someone else it is only getting a little bit of notice.




The point is that Bob would not and could not write a column like that. Denevey covers the NBA on a full time basis and he probably watched almost as many Pacers games last season as Bob did. But the biggest difference is Denevey likely watched hundreds of NBA games, Bob probably watched 4 or 5 non-Pacer games all season.

So the difference is I respect Denevey as an NBA expert, I don't respect Bob as an NBA expert. Simple as that.

If Bob wants to cover the NBA on a full time basis for 12 months, then I will change my opinion of him as "an NBA expert"

Doug in CO
08-03-2006, 08:16 AM
The point is that Bob would not and could not write a column like that. Denevey covers the NBA on a full time basis and he probably watched almost as many Pacers games last season as Bob did. But the biggest difference is Denevey likely watched hundreds of NBA games, Bob probably watched 4 or 5 non-Pacer games all season.

So the difference is I respect Denevey as an NBA expert, I don't respect Bob as an NBA expert. Simple as that.

If Bob wants to cover the NBA on a full time basis for 12 months, then I will change my opinion of him as "an NBA expert"

How does everyone know how many games Bob watches? You are all assuming he is at home watching American Idol instead of the Pacers. Maybe he watches all of the games. Maybe he doesn't. But you all pretend to be living in a house with him and know what he does.

naptownmenace
08-03-2006, 11:21 AM
Gimpsley. :rotflmao:


Say what you will about Sean but he's been around a long time and he's been right about the Pacers and the NBA in general most of the time.

I have to agree with the part about promoting Tinsley by trading AJ. That was a very ill-advised move by Bird (unless he's traded later on this season). Can't knock him for the AC trade though. I have to admit that so far it seems like they are relying on a bunch of unprovens to improve their roster.

That part about Bird was pretty eye-opening. I'm surprised so many people just glossed over the fact that agents are saying that players don't really like Bird. Not too hard to believe... interesting at any rate.

clemdogg
08-03-2006, 11:45 AM
:laugh:


I ripped this article at RATS and didn't feel like repeating it here, figured half the people might have read over there anyway. But the crux of my point was this - how has this team really gotten worse if Harrington is signed?

They ARE NOT trying to be Phoenix and Walsh just said so in his presser, so they aren't "PHX without shooters". They ARE NOT done dealing, per DW and the size of the roster (at the least someone has to be cut), and they DID WIN 41 with Ron/Peja gone for a month, with JO and Tinsley hurt half the year, with AC out more than a month, with Fred in the toilet in the 2nd half due to the broken finger, and with Jack playing every night.

Sure the loss of AJ is devestating (sarcasm), but they have added enough to make up for it I think.

JO and Tinsley will at least be as healthy as last year, Harrington rebounds better than Ron and Peja, plays better defense than Peja, and will likely play the full year rather than sitting a month while demanding a trade.

Oh, and the coach hasn't missed the playoffs yet.


How that all adds up to "they will bomb" is beyond me, and why he compares them to PHX (loser) rather than the more defensive oriented Mavs (Avery), Heat (Riley), Spurs and Pistons is beyond me. They forgot to tell those teams/coaches that defense and grinding it out is dead and won't get you to the Finals.

Not exactly sure what his version of era is, but unless its about 3 months I don't think we are seeing a "new NBA" just yet.

I think this is exactly correct. Assuming we get Al, which was safe to say at the time this article was written, theres no way you can look at the Pacers and say we are going to break the "good-but-not-great jinx" by being worse. Theres just no way. Like I said, we would have at least 3 double digit starters in Al, JO, and Quis, and we are still coached by Rick Carlisle. And you're telling me just because we want a faster pace this year, he is all of a sudden a bad coach? No, Rick is definetly not known as Mike D'Antoni. And I'm glad he isn't. When I think of Rick, I think of winner, because thats what he does - he wins games. I wish someone could show me 30 games in the last 2 years where we should have "picked up the tempo."

Sure, we should have traded Jax and Tins, but we havent yet, and it isn't looking like we will. That doesn't mean we get worse by playing our best poing guard when hes healthy and probably finding Jax's replacement as starting SG. I trust Larry and Donny enough to know that they probably were looking to get nothing out of anything with a trade involving Jax and Tins, so I'm glad, in that regard, that we didn't just give them up for nothing. Meanwhile, Deveney makes it sound like we can just press a button and get rid of Jax and Tins and there contracts.

The only thing I remotely agree with is probably the aspect of which I know least about, and thats Larry as our GM. I'm not sure how comfortable I am with that yet, and I can see that stuff about him being true, although I really, really don't want it to be.

Theres just no way we can improve our team that much from last year and get worse this year. Not with Rick on the sidelines. We have too many constants. Deveney is way off.

Bball
08-03-2006, 11:56 AM
I could see how these players don't like Bird. Mental toughness, teamwork, and fundamentally solid aren't words I think of when I think of some members of this team. Especially at the core. OTOH, I do think of those things when I think about Bird and I could envision him being frustrated with them.

-Bball

Rinuven
08-03-2006, 12:02 PM
One more example of the media underestimating the Pacers. In 5 months it will be..."I knew the Pacers would be good this year all along." It's like Bill Walton announcing a Pacers game when the Pacers are the undergog. He will say how we just don't have what it takes. By the time we've taken an 8 point lead into the half he will be saying we should go deep in the playoffs. The Pacers are the Rodney Dangerfields of the NBA every year.

Thanks for posting, Red. I was beginning to think I was the only one around that doesn't feel like the Pacers are about to take a dirt nap. C'mon, gang, the reason the Pacers have reached the playoffs as many times as they have the past couple decades is because of the quality management. Yeah, I'm still waiting on a championship just like the next guy, but I'll take the Pacers organization any day over some of the other franchises (i.e. Atlanta) who struggle every year.

And this article is just complete crap. A) We aren't going to be phoenix. We are going to be a team that can create mismatches and run when the opportunities present themselves. I'm sure we will try and push the tempo to favor our mismatches, but I don't see us running everytime we touch the ball a la phoenix. B) The best offensive year we had in a long time was when Rick Carlisle was in charge of offense under Bird. I think we averaged over 100 pts. Don't tell me the guy doesn't have the know how to help his players get the ball in the hoop. Carlisle built his reputation on defensive-minded teams because he had those types of players on the bench.

Do we need some outside shooting? Yes. Will Tinsley be able to play a full season? Beats the hell out of me. All I know is that there is still time to make moves and I haven't heard TPTB say they've stopped looking. Have some faith! :)

Hicks
08-03-2006, 02:18 PM
Thanks for posting, Red. I was beginning to think I was the only one around that doesn't feel like the Pacers are about to take a dirt nap. C'mon, gang, the reason the Pacers have reached the playoffs as many times as they have the past couple decades is because of the quality management. Yeah, I'm still waiting on a championship just like the next guy, but I'll take the Pacers organization any day over some of the other franchises (i.e. Atlanta) who struggle every year.

And this article is just complete crap. A) We aren't going to be phoenix. We are going to be a team that can create mismatches and run when the opportunities present themselves. I'm sure we will try and push the tempo to favor our mismatches, but I don't see us running everytime we touch the ball a la phoenix. B) The best offensive year we had in a long time was when Rick Carlisle was in charge of offense under Bird. I think we averaged over 100 pts. Don't tell me the guy doesn't have the know how to help his players get the ball in the hoop. Carlisle built his reputation on defensive-minded teams because he had those types of players on the bench.

Do we need some outside shooting? Yes. Will Tinsley be able to play a full season? Beats the hell out of me. All I know is that there is still time to make moves and I haven't heard TPTB say they've stopped looking. Have some faith! :)

Thank you.

Peck
08-03-2006, 03:08 PM
I've been out of town for the past 5 days without internet access, if you're referring to me. I still think it's premature to comment too much about next season. If we go into next season with Tinsley, then I think he will have made a valid point about him, but it would have been more meaningful and resonant had he made it going into the season with Tinsley still on our roster. I don't know, but this article just seems to ring hollow right now.

Nope, wasn't referring to you at all.

Dr. Goldfoot
08-03-2006, 03:26 PM
The year the Pacers averaged over 100 (2000), they had 8 guys who shot over 33% on three pointers for their career. Right now we have 3 Jackson,Armstrong and Runi. In 2000, Reggie(.404),Jalen(.393),Crosh(.362),Travis(.376), Jackson(.403),Big Smooth(.408),Mullin(.409) and McKey(.435). Amazingly the 2006 Pacers attempted more 3's than the 2000 Pacers. When you have that many guys consistently hitting their threes it opens up the floor for easier buckets. Right now the Pacers don't have that advantage.

Mark Jackson ... Jamaal Tinsley
Reggie Miller ... Stephen Jackson
Jalen Rose ... Danny Granger
Dale Davis ... Al Harrington
Jermaine O'neal ... Rik Smits
Chris Mullin ... Marquis Daniels
Travis Best ... Runi
Sam Perkins ... David Harrison
Derrick McKey ... Jeff Foster
Al Harrington ... James White
Austin Croshere ... Maceo Baston
Jeff Foster ... Shawne Williams
Jon Bender ... Darrell Armstrong
Zan Tabak ... Orion Greene
... Powell/Marshall/Hunter


not to mention experience
I don't see how Carlisle can even let off on the reigns with this team.

Rinuven
08-03-2006, 04:06 PM
The year the Pacers averaged over 100 (2000), they had 8 guys who shot over 33% on three pointers for their career. Right now we have 3 Jackson,Armstrong and Runi. In 2000, Reggie(.404),Jalen(.393),Crosh(.362),Travis(.376), Jackson(.403),Big Smooth(.408),Mullin(.409) and McKey(.435). Amazingly the 2006 Pacers attempted more 3's than the 2000 Pacers. When you have that many guys consistently hitting their threes it opens up the floor for easier buckets. Right now the Pacers don't have that advantage.

Mark Jackson ... Jamaal Tinsley
Reggie Miller ... Stephen Jackson
Jalen Rose ... Danny Granger
Dale Davis ... Al Harrington
Jermaine O'neal ... Rik Smits
Chris Mullin ... Marquis Daniels
Travis Best ... Runi
Sam Perkins ... David Harrison
Derrick McKey ... Jeff Foster
Al Harrington ... James White
Austin Croshere ... Maceo Baston
Jeff Foster ... Shawne Williams
Jon Bender ... Darrell Armstrong
Zan Tabak ... Orion Greene
... Powell/Marshall/Hunter


not to mention experience
I don't see how Carlisle can even let off on the reigns with this team.

I'm not saying that this group we have now is going to average 100 or match 3 pt percentage like the 2000 squad. The point I was making is that I beleive Carlisle to be a coach that knows how to use the skills available to him. Look at the 2000 squad, what a well-oiled machine that was. Coming down the floor, reading the defense, you could predict the exact play the guys were going to execute. Yes, absolutely, experience is a major factor, but it's also a recognition of what the guys are capable of. The 2000 squad was a great shooting squad, thankfully. Because they were one of the most unatheletic basketball teams I've ever seen. So maybe we don't get that great outside threat (although, there is still time to make some moves), but I think we have a coach that knows how to be effective with the types of players we have.

I'll be the first to say that I think Rick lost the team last year. But I don't think it was Rick or any one person's fault. I think they all kind of gave up on each other. Anyone talking about specifics beyond the front office and the locker room is speculating at best. I have enough trust that the moves that have been made, and are still being made are happening for the right reasons. I'm looking forward to watching again, which is a nice change over the past couple summers.

Dr. Goldfoot
08-03-2006, 04:41 PM
I can go for that. Sometime change is good just because. Perhaps some athleticism will make up for the lack of outside shooting. I just don't see him opening up the offense and letting the majority of these guys make any decisions. Outside of two or three guys your looking at a bunch of inexperience on this roster. I think my point is what has changed about the floor leadership of this team compared to the teams from the past few years that will allow Rick the comfort of not calling every offensive set. The makeup of our current team is practiaclly the opposite of the 2000 team. Look at all the experience and veteran leadership in 2000 compared to 2006. There's not a single player on the current roster with the ability to lead like Reggie or Jacko or Mully or Big Smooth or even Mckey,Smits and Dale. This team is more like the 2000 Jalen's and Baby Al's, the guys who needed the leaders out there to help them along and give them the eye when they stepped out of line or screwed up. I think if any body on this team gave the eye they'd recieve one to the eye.


With that said I'm pretty pumped about 2006, too. If I had it my way we'd be 82-0 averaging 115 and 17 steals a game. I'm just trying to be realistic and offer different to views to be discussed.