PDA

View Full Version : Is Walsh dumb like a fox?



McKeyFan
10-11-2006, 09:54 PM
I'm reading Walsh and Bird's comments and they just don't add up.

Here is a thought:

Walsh, an attorney, whom we can assume is VERY connected to local attorneys, judges, and elected officials, has been getting a good bit of information on what is about to go down--what he calls "third party sources."

He has concluded from these top sources that Jackson will no longer play for the Pacers because of legal infractions.

Publicly, they support Jax and say "they want to see him back on the court as soon as possible" because this pleases the portion of the base that would be angry if they put the hammer down on Jackson.

Since the hammer's coming down anyway from prosecutors, the other portion of the fan base is also satisfied.

That is the only way I can make sense of their comments. Otherwise, they just sound lame and kinda uninformed, or, dumb like a fox.

ajbry
10-11-2006, 09:56 PM
When will you stop with your theories in order to elevate your hatred of Jack?

Give it a rest, damn.

Putnam
10-11-2006, 10:03 PM
I'll go with this:


Otherwise, they just sound lame and kinda uninformed,

McKey, I thought they looked and sounded whipped. The Collective Bargaining Agreement has them licked, and they know it.

I'd love to be wrong about this. I've been wrong before. I was wrong about Jackson between Monday and Thursday evening, when I decided he deserved a clean slate.

McKeyFan
10-11-2006, 10:14 PM
The Collective Bargaining Agreement has them licked, and they know it.

This is part of my thought: if the CBA keeps them from suspending/punishing right away, or, say, they can get sued for taking action for yet unprovable or off the court actions, then they take the route they have taken.

Or, as you say, they are just whipped.

I think pretty highly of Walsh's intelligence and integrity, so I guess I'm fishing for some kind of theory to explain his weird response to all this.

Evan_The_Dude
10-11-2006, 10:26 PM
We won tonight.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 10:29 PM
Yeah this is probably the case. Stephen Jackson fired gun shots in the air, which NEVER happens, so he's probably done in the NBA. The Simons probably wont care about about the 7 million dollars a year contract.

!Pacers-Fan!
10-11-2006, 10:37 PM
so what? he told the truth, and wat he really knows. u can't do anything bout that. Stop Complaining already, omg.

JayRedd
10-11-2006, 10:59 PM
The guy has a very average contract in terms of money per year. It sucks they're on the books for four more years, but that's not going to stop them from waiving him.

You guys understand that the Simons stand to lose a lot more in lost revenue than $7 million per year here right?

They cut there loses and resign the youngn's (Hulk and Gift) and hope to trade for someone's Bird rights and re-sign them too. I imagine they're willing to exceed the luxury tax in order to maintain some semblence of a fan base.

Consider Jackson cut.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 11:10 PM
The guy has a very average contract in terms of money per year. It sucks they're on the books for four more years, but that's not going to stop them from waiving him.

You guys understand that the Simons stand to lose a lot more in lost revenue than $7 million per year here right?

They cut there loses and resign the youngn's (Hulk and Gift) and hope to trade for someone's Bird rights and re-sign them too. I imagine they're willing to exceed the luxury tax in order to maintain some semblence of a fan base.

Consider Jackson cut.

Oh my God, you are seriously out of your mind! This isn't the NFL, when was the last time an NBA player with 4 years left on their contract was cut? Did the Lakers cut Kobe when he supposedly raped a girl (Rape isn't near the crime shooting a gun in the air is :rolleyes:)? Please just stop assuming all this crap that you know is not true.

Consider Jackson the Pacers starting SG this season.

sixthman
10-11-2006, 11:14 PM
The guy has a very average contract in terms of money per year. It sucks they're on the books for four more years, but that's not going to stop them from waiving him.

You guys understand that the Simons stand to lose a lot more in lost revenue than $7 million per year here right?

They cut there loses and resign the youngn's (Hulk and Gift) and hope to trade for someone's Bird rights and re-sign them too. I imagine they're willing to exceed the luxury tax in order to maintain some semblence of a fan base.

Consider Jackson cut.

I could see the Pacers and Jackson getting together on a fair buyout now, if the Pacers want to part ways and Stephen wants a new start somewhere else after his legal problems are over.

I wonder also if there is a possible probation violation now in Michigan for Stephen. If Michigan now wants to say he violated the terms of his probation, Stephen could be facing some jail time in the not to distant future.

JayRedd
10-11-2006, 11:18 PM
Oh my God, you are seriously out of your mind! This isn't the NFL, when was the last time an NBA player with 4 years left on their contract was cut? Did the Lakers cut Kobe when he supposedly raped a girl (Rape isn't near the crime shooting a gun in the air is :rolleyes:)? Please just stop assuming all this crap that you know is not true.

Consider Jackson the Pacers starting SG this season.

If Jackson was 1/4 the player Kobe was then this might be a legitimate argument.

Our front office has been hampered with Bender's contract for years. Cutting Jax isn't any worse than that. Hell, Bender still probably has more trade value.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 11:21 PM
If Jackson was 1/4 the player Kobe was then this might be a legitimate argument.

Our front office has been hampered with Bender's contract for years. Cutting Jax isn't any worse than that. Hell, Bender still probably has more trade value.

How is that? I thought it had nothing to do with his talent and everything to do with him being an embarrassment to this team. You CAN NOT have it both ways.

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 11:24 PM
I could see the Pacers and Jackson getting together on a fair buyout now, if the Pacers want to part ways and Stephen wants a new start somewhere else after his legal problems are over.

I wonder also if there is a possible probation violation now in Michigan for Stephen. If Michigan now wants to say he violated the terms of his probation, Stephen could be facing some jail time in the not to distant future.


Channel 8 is reporting that the Oakland County prosecutor said that they will not decide whether to enforce the jail until after the legal problems in Indiana are resolved.

Bball
10-11-2006, 11:25 PM
Consider Jackson the Pacers starting SG this season.

Jay wants a shooting guard who shoots.... I guess Sjax certainly does fit that bill!

:rimshot:

-Bball

MagicRat
10-11-2006, 11:28 PM
I heard Kravitz on ESPN radio during my drive home from the game. Apparently his column tomorrow is going to say the best outcome for the Pacers is Stephen being convicted so they can cut him.......

Unclebuck
10-11-2006, 11:35 PM
I heard Kravitz on ESPN radio during my drive home from the game. Apparently his column tomorrow is going to say the best outcome for the Pacers is Stephen being convicted so they can cut him.......

I can agree with that, certainly from a PR basis.

McKeyFan
10-11-2006, 11:38 PM
I heard Kravitz on ESPN radio during my drive home from the game. Apparently his column tomorrow is going to say the best outcome for the Pacers is Stephen being convicted so they can cut him.......

Doesn't really solve the problem. Won't it take months, possibly after the season is done, for it to go to trial?

It won't be that easy for Kravitz or TPTB. Tough decisions will need to be made in a few days.

JayRedd
10-11-2006, 11:39 PM
How is that? I thought it had nothing to do with his talent and everything to do with him being an embarrassment to this team. You CAN NOT have it both ways.

It has to do with both. Don't get me confused with those that on some moral outrage mentality.

Guy is average to begin with.

If he was Rodman, Sheed or, damn, even Zach Randolph quality maybe he could stick around and redeem himself.

But when your ceiling is a poor-man's Ricky Davis, there's only so much that a group of midwestern fans is gonna put up with.

Not sure why this is so complicated.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 11:44 PM
It has to do with both. Don't get me confused with those that on some moral outrage mentality.

Guy is average to begin with.

If he was Rodman, Sheed or, damn, even Zach Randolph quality maybe he could stick around and redeem himself.

But when your ceiling is a poor-man's Ricky Davis, there's only so much that a group of midwestern fans is gonna put up with.

Not sure why this is so complicated.

It's not complicated, you guys just need to realize that just because you want him cut does not mean the Simons want to pay him. You guys are blowing what he did way out of proportion.

Bball
10-11-2006, 11:48 PM
If Sjax has admitted to firing a gun into the air, at a strip club, and hanging out with people who had dope, and fighting (and who knows at this point what his role in starting this whole thing is and what he's said) then the Pacers could have legal grounds to challenge SJax' contract if they want to.

They don't need to wait for a trial to sort out what laws he may or may not have broken. Surely there's some type of conduct (or morals) clause in his contract that it could be argued that he has broken... and by his own admission (in police statements).

Yes, the player's union might take issue (surely they would just as a matter of principle). That doesn't mean they'd win in court themselves (if it would go that far). And the Pacers probably win the PR battle by a mile. The question becomes whether they (Pacers) actually would prefer to wipe their hands of Sjax and how much bad blood they'd be willing to create with the player's union.

I don't think it is cut and dried at all that the Pacers would have to see this thing thru the court system AND need a conviction before they could make a move. They could make a move tonight if they wanted to.

-Bball

JayRedd
10-11-2006, 11:54 PM
It's not complicated, you guys just need to realize that just because you want him cut does not mean the Simons want to pay him. You guys are blowing what he did way out of proportion.

Honestly, the last thing i want is $7 million on our books for four years for no prroduction.

I just see us as having two options: Play him or waive him.

And the only one of those that makes any business sense to me from the Simosns standpoint is to waive him. It's unfortunate and it would be nice if the Pacers fans would just forgive and forget because Jax is actually a decent player, but I don't see them doing it. And more so in Indiana than almost anywhere else, the Simons have to listen to their "shareholders".

Leisure Suit Larry
10-11-2006, 11:56 PM
Honestly, the last thing i want is $7 million on our books for four years for no prroduction.

I just see us as having two options: Play him or waive him.

And the only one of those that makes any business sense to me from the Simosns standpoint is to waive him. It's unfortunate and it would be nice if the Pacers fans would just forgive and forget because Jax is actually a decent player, but I don't see them doing it. And more so in Indiana than almost anywhere else, the Simons have to listen to their "shareholders".

LOL, it's not going to happen.

ChicagoJ
10-12-2006, 12:06 AM
Jay wants a shooting guard who shoots.... I guess Sjax certainly does fit that bill!

:rimshot:

-Bball

Now wait a minute... I want a guard that 'hits'. Stephen had yet another 0-5 shooting night from outside.

Although, I suppose by another definition of 'hits'. Swingin' Jackson would get the nod.

Will Galen
10-12-2006, 07:38 AM
Now wait a minute... I want a guard that 'hits'. Stephen had yet another 0-5 shooting night from outside.


As usual you're wrong again. (giggle, giggle, snort)

Jackson didn't go 0-5, he went 5-5, all of those bullets hit something.

ChicagoJ
10-12-2006, 10:19 AM
As usual you're wrong again. (giggle, giggle, snort)

Jackson didn't go 0-5, he went 5-5, all of those bullets hit something.

I suppose you're right. Its just like most of his ill-advised jumpshots that clank off the rim or backboard. They do hit *something*.

Unclebuck
10-12-2006, 10:24 AM
Jay, let me ask you this question: Are the Pacers a better team without Jackson. Wait, let me put a qualifier on this, lets say the trial won't start until after the season and playoffs are over. OK,

ChicagoJ
10-12-2006, 10:34 AM
You asking me or Redd?

I listened to more of last night's game than I watched it, but right now I think that Marquis Daniels and James White can more-than make up for the subtraction of SJax (who, as far as I'm concerned, has a long list of on-court negatives anyway - shot selection, low FG%, and turnovers). And Danny can play SG in a pinch.

So I'm not the right guy to ask - I've been hoping all along that Daniels and White would just beat out SJax for spots in the rotation.

Just because he's on the roster does not mean he has to play if those two prove they can handle the minutes/ responsibility.

By drafting Granger, by trading a PF that struggled to be in the rotation for Daniels, we've found the replacements for most of our riff-raff (I'm still not convinced Tinsley is riff-raff but I know many of you do - and there's certainly no viable on-roster replacement for him yet, either).

And we've got too many players competing for minutes. Something's gotta give...

Black Sox
10-12-2006, 10:38 AM
Jackson will be with the Pacers this year.

Unclebuck
10-12-2006, 10:58 AM
You asking me or Redd?

I listened to more of last night's game than I watched it, but right now I think that Marquis Daniels and James White can more-than make up for the subtraction of SJax (who, as far as I'm concerned, has a long list of on-court negatives anyway - shot selection, low FG%, and turnovers). And Danny can play SG in a pinch.

So I'm not the right guy to ask - I've been hoping all along that Daniels and White would just beat out SJax for spots in the rotation.

Just because he's on the roster does not mean he has to play if those two prove they can handle the minutes/ responsibility.

By drafting Granger, by trading a PF that struggled to be in the rotation for Daniels, we've found the replacements for most of our riff-raff (I'm still not convinced Tinsley is riff-raff but I know many of you do - and there's certainly no viable on-roster replacement for him yet, either).

And we've got too many players competing for minutes. Something's gotta give...


I was asking you.

I think the Pacers would be a better team overall with Jackson on the roster and him playing 25 minutes or so per game. The question I have is he worth having on the roster, Obviously Jay you don't think so, and I'm just not sure, because no matter how good or bad a player Jax is right now he is a lightning rod to the fans, if they are going to boo him a lot, then I think the net effect is negative on the team.

ChicagoJ
10-12-2006, 12:54 PM
You were there, on time, last night. Right?

How loudly was Tinsley boo'ed?

Were Snap and Daniels boo'ed?

Given that SJax was getting boo'ed quite a bit *last season*, that is only going to go up.

Unclebuck
10-12-2006, 01:16 PM
You were there, on time, last night. Right?

How loudly was Tinsley boo'ed?

Were Snap and Daniels boo'ed?

Given that SJax was getting boo'ed quite a bit *last season*, that is only going to go up.

I wasn't at the game. I'll be there Saturday night

McKeyFan
10-12-2006, 02:20 PM
I think the Pacers would be a better team overall with Jackson on the roster and him playing 25 minutes or so per game..

I disagreed with this long before the recent incident.

Jax negatives far outweigh his positives, imo, making us worse team overall.

- He creates strife (shoving JO, not passing to Saras).

- He models argumentative "blame" behavior toward the refs.

- He has a gansta, attitude, "It's all about me," let's be respected overall countenance that hurts selfless, mature, team behavior on and off the court.

- He does not really look to pass first, creating a sense of "I better get mine at some point" mentality with the squad playing with him.

I think are probably several more I could name, but that's good enough. If you wrote a script on how TPTB has held on to this guy so long and affirmed and pampered him, I wouldn't believe it.

spazzxb
10-12-2006, 02:35 PM
Oh my God, you are seriously out of your mind! This isn't the NFL, when was the last time an NBA player with 4 years left on their contract was cut? Did the Lakers cut Kobe when he supposedly raped a girl (Rape isn't near the crime shooting a gun in the air is :rolleyes:)? Please just stop assuming all this crap that you know is not true.

Consider Jackson the Pacers starting SG this season.

Another good comparison would be on our very own colts. Last summer Mike doss wass charged for firing a handgun in Ohio. Hmm, did he even miss time? If jackson gets a significant amount of time out of any of this it is a sad day for our government. It has been said that our justice system is designed so 10 guilty men would go free before one innocent man is found guilty. The same people hoping for Jack to be found guilty(if it benifits the pacers), are the exact same people who are gullible enough to believe a peson being found innocent truly means the did nothing wrong. Anyways If the tax paying people of indy honestly think spending their tax dollars on an expensive DNA test to determine who touched a misdemeanors worth of pot is a good thing, Just make sure its city and not state tax dollars.

Leisure Suit Larry
10-12-2006, 03:11 PM
The following message is brought to you by the Pacers Digest IGNORE button....

Why because he tells the truth and you can stand it because you want a player on your supposedly favorite team to go get in trouble?

Kraft
10-12-2006, 03:26 PM
If Sjax has admitted to firing a gun into the air, at a strip club, and hanging out with people who had dope, and fighting (and who knows at this point what his role in starting this whole thing is and what he's said) then the Pacers could have legal grounds to challenge SJax' contract if they want to.

They don't need to wait for a trial to sort out what laws he may or may not have broken. Surely there's some type of conduct (or morals) clause in his contract that it could be argued that he has broken... and by his own admission (in police statements).

Yes, the player's union might take issue (surely they would just as a matter of principle). That doesn't mean they'd win in court themselves (if it would go that far). And the Pacers probably win the PR battle by a mile. The question becomes whether they (Pacers) actually would prefer to wipe their hands of Sjax and how much bad blood they'd be willing to create with the player's union.

I don't think it is cut and dried at all that the Pacers would have to see this thing thru the court system AND need a conviction before they could make a move. They could make a move tonight if they wanted to.

-Bball

Now here's the realistic solution that can be hoped for. And it begs the question, what kind of clauses like this are in player contracts? If I'm a Star reporter, that's what I'm investigating. That's an interesting story, an interesting question to ask DW/LB.

I wish they'd stopped quoting that canned crap. Ask a real question with a real solution. Of course, TPTB could give a stonewall ... that's when you pass the issue over to Kravitz, who could roll with it a little more.

I'm sure an agent, or similar expert, could give some detail about what's typically in the contract, though.

Since86
10-12-2006, 03:28 PM
It's not the truth.

Mike Doss didn't/doesn't nearly have the history Jax does. There is no comparison for this situation.

Mike Doss isn't viewed as a major catalyst in the ugliest basketball brawl in Pacer history, and he doesn't take plays off to ***** at a ref.

Before I read the police report, I was on the fence, and called for people to calm down until facts came out. Well the facts came out, and I feel like a douche for even giving him the benefit of the doubt. He not only lied to the police, he lied to the Pacers, and more imporantly he lied to the fans.

The FANS are what get him a paycheck every week. Without a fan base, there would be no Indiana Pacers. He needs reality to hit him in the ***, and he (along with Ron) need to be prime examples that this organization is done dealing with idiots.

I don't expect angels, but I do expect law abbiding citizens that learn from their mistakes. He has shown zero ability to learn from his mistakes, and in the four, well really 3, years he's been apart of this squad he's been arrested twice. Wow, aren't those mind boggling numbers. 2 out of the 3 years he's been here, he's been arrest for the same charges.

FrenchConnection
10-12-2006, 03:44 PM
Before I read the police report, I was on the fence, and called for people to calm down until facts came out. Well the facts came out, and I feel like a douche for even giving him the benefit of the doubt. He not only lied to the police, he lied to the Pacers, and more imporantly he lied to the fans.


I want Jack gone from the Pacers as much as anyone else, but I want to dispute one point in your post. We still don't have "the facts." In this country, prosecutor's accounts are only one account of an event. If the governments version was always considered correct, then there would be no need for the judicial process. Charges would be convictions, as the truth was already known. People are accused of crimes they did not commit often enough. I just served jury duty today, so these issues are on my mind a bit.

But this is a minor point in this case. Regardless of who's account is correct, shooting a gun in public is not something that I want players doing.

Since86
10-12-2006, 03:48 PM
Video showed Jax kicked Fingers while he was on the groud, walked to his car to get his gun, walked back over to the fight, shot in the air, walked back towards his car (presumably to put away his gun), got hit by a car, and then fired more shots.

If video isn't "facts" then I'm not sure what is.

EDIT: The fight obviously wasn't involving the actual Pacer players, seeing how none of them have even been brought up in the conversation. Jax interjected himself into a fight, to kick someone, who happened to have a disability. Forgetting the fact that "Fingers" barely has fingers, or an arm for that matter, but still kicks someone on the ground is bad enough. You're either in the fight, stand back and let it run it's course, or try to stop it. I don't have any respect for anyone that kicks a man, when he's down, when you have nothing in it.

Everything that's came out has contradicted Jax's story, and he's even admitted to lying. What mroe do you want?

ABADays
10-12-2006, 03:57 PM
I could see the Pacers and Jackson getting together on a fair buyout now, if the Pacers want to part ways and Stephen wants a new start somewhere else after his legal problems are over.

I don't think the Player's Union would ever go for that. They are pretty much an all or all organization.

DisplacedKnick
10-12-2006, 05:00 PM
I don't think the Player's Union would ever go for that. They are pretty much an all or all organization.

Anybody can negotiate a buyout. I believe we're still paying Shandon Anderson on his. Still counts against the cap though.

MagicRat
10-12-2006, 05:04 PM
Video showed Jax kicked Fingers while he was on the groud, walked to his car to get his gun, walked back over to the fight, shot in the air, walked back towards his car (presumably to put away his gun), got hit by a car, and then fired more shots.

If video isn't "facts" then I'm not sure what is.

Do we know that much about the video? All I've read is pretty generic (some of the fight, shot in air, hit by car, etc.).

Leisure Suit Larry
10-12-2006, 05:58 PM
Do we know that much about the video? All I've read is pretty generic (some of the fight, shot in air, hit by car, etc.).

No it doesn't say that much in the police report that was on IndyStar.com. He's just spinning it to make it sound like what he wants.

Tom White
10-12-2006, 06:07 PM
Another good comparison would be on our very own colts. Last summer Mike doss wass charged for firing a handgun in Ohio. Hmm, did he even miss time?


As I remember, Doss was suspended for two games. That equals one-eigth of the NFL regular season. IF you want to make a comparison to the NBA season, that would translate to roughly ten NBA games.

able
10-12-2006, 06:18 PM
As I remember, Doss was suspended for two games. That equals one-eigth of the NFL regular season. IF you want to make a comparison to the NBA season, that would translate to roughly ten NBA games.

Which is exactly the minimum the league has written in the CBA for convictions or pleabargains involving fire-arms.
(this includes every outcome excluding not-guilty)