PDA

View Full Version : Kravitz Says.... No Playoffs



DGPR
02-20-2009, 04:37 AM
Indystar.com
Bob Kravitz
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090220/SPORTS15/902200372/1034/SPORTS15

For sure now, forget the playoffs

Larry Bird did a very smart thing during the period leading up to Thursday's 3 p.m. NBA trading deadline.
He did nothing.
http://www.indystar.com/graphics/go4/adlabel_horz.gif
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> OAS_AD('160x600_1'); </SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=javascript1.1 src="http://gannett.gcion.com/addyn/3.0/5111.1/133600/0/-1/ADTECH;size=160x600;alias=in-indianapolis.indystar.com/sports/columnist/article.htm_160x600_1;cookie=info;loc=100;target=_ blank;grp=9367;misc=1235118661211"></SCRIPT>
Well, not really nothing. He did make phone calls, did accept them, did talk various deals with other NBA teams. But when it came time to pull the trigger, the Indiana Pacers president stood pat, and for that, Pacers fans -- at least those who are capable of thinking beyond next week -- should be suitably satisfied.
Too often in recent years, the Pacers have been forced to make bad deals under distress. They had to trade Ron Artest and walked away with a Peja Stojakovic rental. They had to trade Stephen Jackson and ended up with two solid but overpaid and untradeable players, Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy.
Right now, the only trades out there for the Pacers are bad trades. Deals that bring in further drains on the salary cap. Deals that force them to part with cap-relievers like Rasho Nesterovic and Marquis Daniels, two guys with expiring contracts. Virtually all of the deals out there could be summed up this way:
Our junk for their junk.
What's the point?
"We weren't willing to take on long-term deals with players who weren't going to be part of our core group," general manager David Morway said. ". . . We weren't going to do anything to reduce our cap flexibility, which was something we worked really hard to get and wanted to retain. If we could have added a draft pick, we would have, but teams are holding on to them for now."
There were only three good reasons to make a deal:
To rid the franchise of Jamaal Tinsley, the multi-million-dollar albatross.
To add to the team's cap flexibility down the road.
To bring in an additional draft pick.
On all three fronts, good luck.
Nobody is dumb and desperate enough to trade for Tinsley. Every point guard in the NBA could come down with peanut-butter-induced salmonella, and still, nobody would make the move to bring in the Tin Man.
And with the NBA looking at a lower salary-cap and luxury-tax threshold in coming seasons, the two most valuable commodities are added cap flexibility and draft choices.
There was no reason for the Pacers to panic and make a deal they would later regret. The record isn't what they hoped it would be, but on a lot of fronts, this season has been a relative success. They dumped Jermaine O'Neal's contract, brought seven new players into the system, established an entertaining offensive style of play and . . . no gun play or appearances on the police blotter.
Standing pat is a difficult, counterintuitive thing for Bird, who breathes to win and has just one year left on his deal. It would have been tempting to make a deal that would have brought in a player like, say, Tyson Chandler, the defense-minded New Orleans center who might have given the Pacers a boost in the effort to earn a playoff spot.
But what sense would that have made, short term or long term? Especially now with word that Danny Granger is going to be out of the lineup for 10 days to three weeks with a foot injury, and talk that Mike Dunleavy might not return this season?
News flash: They're not going to make the playoffs. They weren't going to make the playoffs even before the Granger injury. The Eastern Conference is fool's gold that dupes lousy teams into thinking they can sneak into that eighth spot. They should have forgotten about the postseason a long time ago. Keep playing Roy Hibbert, who has developed into a possible core player. Play Brandon Rush, a disappointing basket case whose only chance of emerging from his shell is by getting minutes.
Forget the fact that nobody was offering anything worthwhile to the Pacers. Ask yourself this: Who do the Pacers have who might be worthwhile to another team? And would the Pacers be willing to part with that player?
Granger is untouchable, unless Cleveland calls and offers LeBron James.
I wouldn't move Hibbert, who has a chance to be a solid center for years to come. I wouldn't move Rush, who's too young to be dismissed as a bust. I wouldn't move Nesterovic or Daniels, whose expiring contracts will free up roughly $15 million. The Pacers blundered by moving Austin Croshere for Daniels just when Croshere's expiring deal made him the most valuable.
Now, one guy who is valuable to other teams and a guy I would move is Jeff Foster, and it boggles the mind to comprehend why the Pacers appear to be so keen on keeping him. Great guy, solid citizen and he plays hard, but he's a rotation player and he's starting to break down.
In the end, it was a quiet day for the Pacers, just as it was for most of the league. That was a good thing for Indiana. A smart thing. A patient thing. This isn't about this year. It's about next year, and the years after that.

-------------

I seriously don't understand why he called Brandon Rush a "basket case". The kid hasn't done a damn thing to deserve something like that, or maybe I'm just reading it the wrong way.

Bball
02-20-2009, 04:55 AM
I seriously don't understand why he called Brandon Rush a "basket case". The kid hasn't done a damn thing to deserve something like that, or maybe I'm just reading it the wrong way.

I think you're taking it the wrong way... at least if you are taking it to mean "nut job" or something similar. I took it to mean Rush has lost his confidence and direction. That he's got butterflies... is a bundle of nerves... isn't sure of himself or his game any longer....etc..

Roaming Gnome
02-20-2009, 04:59 AM
I wonder how much Mike Wells had to spoon feed him to be able to write this column? I think it is pretty well known that Kravitz has a pretty poor working knowledge of the NBA.

Mourning
02-20-2009, 07:21 AM
Yet I can't help, but agree with almost all of it.

lafayettepacer
02-20-2009, 09:45 AM
I wonder how much Mike Wells had to spoon feed him to be able to write this column? I think it is pretty well known that Kravitz has a pretty poor working knowledge of the NBA.

Mike Wells spoon-feeding him is one possibility, but the other is that Kravitz gets his info and some of his opinions from reading message boards like this. There's been a few times over the years when his comments sound eerily like those of members of this board (or the Star's board).

Major Cold
02-20-2009, 10:17 AM
Mike Wells spoon-feeding him is one possibility, but the other is that Kravitz gets his info and some of his opinions from reading message boards like this. There's been a few times over the years when his comments sound eerily like those of members of this board (or the Star's board).


You know what funny....He gets paid.... No really I saw an AP guy on PD during a game once.

Kegboy
02-20-2009, 10:40 AM
Mr. Obvious strikes again. :kravitz:

McKeyFan
02-20-2009, 10:44 AM
I think you're taking it the wrong way... at least if you are taking it to mean "nut job" or something similar. I took it to mean Rush has lost his confidence and direction. That he's got butterflies... is a bundle of nerves... isn't sure of himself or his game any longer....etc..

I agree. And I think Kravitz is putting some of the onus on JOB.

BillS
02-20-2009, 10:45 AM
I am very frightened that I actually agree with almost everything here. :onozomg:

I disagree that any of the Foster deals were lost opportunities because, as far as I can tell, we got nothing "core" from them and Foster is the last player we should trade simply because we could. I understand that many see Foster as a nutritious part of a good breakfast who is bad for you if he is the whole meal, but I think his destiny is to be the bench vet for the Pacers who helps keep the locker room stable and shows an example of a work ethic.

Brad8888
02-20-2009, 10:49 AM
They could save money by simply paying for articles from freelancers from the public, and instructing them what tone / agenda they are trying to push. They would get better talent as well.

Unclebuck
02-20-2009, 10:51 AM
I agree. And I think Kravitz is putting some of the onus on JOB.

If JOB is going to get some of the blame for Rush's problems, then JOB deserves a lot of the credit for Hibberts recent play (I think he's really improved from earlier in the season)

Brad8888
02-20-2009, 11:04 AM
Playing time matters. Without consistently getting it, either no development or backsliding is likely to occur due to a lack of confidence and the struggle of adjusting to teammates tendencies while trying to execute within a system that the player is not familiar with is difficult to overcome, especially after coming from spending four years at a fundamentally sound basketball school, as both Hibbert and Rush did. Hibbert is being trusted more and is responding somewhat to that, and now we should be giving Rush a chance as well, regardless of how many mistakes he makes for a while. We should also encourage him to shoot more so that his confidence on offense that he had at Kansas is re-established. Will this occur? Time will tell.

count55
02-20-2009, 11:28 AM
Playing time matters. Without consistently getting it, either no development or backsliding is likely to occur due to a lack of confidence and the struggle of adjusting to teammates tendencies while trying to execute within a system that the player is not familiar with is difficult to overcome, especially after coming from spending four years at a fundamentally sound basketball school, as both Hibbert and Rush did. Hibbert is being trusted more and is responding somewhat to that, and now we should be giving Rush a chance as well, regardless of how many mistakes he makes for a while. We should also encourage him to shoot more so that his confidence on offense that he had at Kansas is re-established. Will this occur? Time will tell.

Of course, Rush got extensive playing time early in the season and has been shown more trust by JOB than Hibbert in many ways, not the least of which being the fact that O'Brien has left him on the floor with key assignments during crunch time of several games. I can't recall once Hibbert being on the floor at the end of a close game.

I actually think O'Brien has done a much better job with Rush than he has with Hibbert. However, Hibbert is actually responding better than Rush is. Rush has struggled with success this year, mysteriously disappearing just after it appeared he had finally put it together. (Seth will likely come along and disagree with this, but, while it is a criticism of Rush, it is not an indictment. I like Rush as a player a lot, and I still expect him to become a productive member of this franchise's future.)

Now, all that being said, I absolutely believe it's time, now and for the rest of the season, to basically give both all the minutes they can handle. Rush is a "basket case" in that he overthinks the game to much. He's like a golfer with the case of the yips. He doesn't have faith in his core shooting/game, so he keeps making adjustments in what he's doing, trying to find the sweet spot. Then, when it starts working, it's never long lasting because it's based on some cobbled together adjustments of turning his left foot out, opening his stance, and shortening up his backswing. In effect, his shot isn't working because he's not developing consistently good form, rather he's band-aiding and adjusting to an approach that's not sustainable.

That's actually the reason I still have a lot of faith in Rush. His problems are eminently correctable.

Anyway, I generally agree with this article, and I would consider the misuse of Rush and Hibbert for the balance of this season to be a firable offense by O'Brien.

Einstein
02-20-2009, 11:41 AM
I would love to see Rush out there doing well. However, watching him play offense, I'm often thinking "what was that?". I worry that Rush just doesn't have offensive talent to really contribute. With Hibbert its different. I can see the potential and see the talent. He makes mistakes, but those can be fixed.

Rush really needs to work with that new shot coach. With that athleticism, he might combine an adequate jumper with power to the rim and contribute.

Jonathan
02-20-2009, 11:48 AM
If JOB is going to get some of the blame for Rush's problems, then JOB deserves a lot of the credit for Hibberts recent play (I think he's really improved from earlier in the season)

UB. I was talking to one of my buddies yesterday and told him I feel Hibbert has improved his game more than anybody on our entire roster this season. I remember his first game @ the Coliseum that ended in ejection and they I watch him play against Philly on Tuesday and was impressed.

Jonathan
02-20-2009, 11:51 AM
I would love to see Rush out there doing well. However, watching him play offense, I'm often thinking "what was that?". I worry that Rush just doesn't have offensive talent to really contribute. With Hibbert its different. I can see the potential and see the talent. He makes mistakes, but those can be fixed.

Rush really needs to work with that new shot coach. With that athleticism, he might combine an adequate jumper with power to the rim and contribute.

Rush is fine. He might be struggling with his fg% but he has great form. He does a fine job on defense. He should benefit more from more playing time. I was watching the game against Charlotte and Clark Kellog said he his a volume shooter. I think he will be able to get more shots with Danny Granger out let's see how he does.

duke dynamite
02-20-2009, 12:02 PM
Of course Kravitz is going to say this. You know, this is no big surprise that are chances are shot with Danny out on top of Mike and Jeff...

I don't understand how so much can be written over the obvious.

Anthem
02-20-2009, 12:04 PM
No really I saw an AP guy on PD during a game once.
That's awesome.

Kstat
02-20-2009, 12:06 PM
hey, we have something in common now!

Justin Tyme
02-20-2009, 12:08 PM
If JOB is going to get some of the blame for Rush's problems, then JOB deserves a lot of the credit for Hibberts recent play (I think he's really improved from earlier in the season)


Just exactly what has JO'B done to receive this credit of Hibbert's recent play other than give the kid some PT? He sure can't take the credit for the improvement in Hibbert's shooting. That credit goes to Billy Keller.

If coaches were tradeable, JO'B would be the Tinsley of coaches. No one would trade for him and the Pacers would be stuck with another contract they couldn't get rid of until it expired or was boughtout.

Now, with the injury to Granger and Dunleavy, let's see how JO'B coaches. Will he stay with what's not been a success the last 56 games or will he try and play a different style with the loss of the best 2 players who contributes 40 points in a system of run n gun. If he continues this system, just how many teams is he going to out gun? Slowing it down, going with a bigger lineup, and playing some of that thing he gives lip service to called DEFENSE might be something for him to consider for more than 1-2 seconds. Surely, he isn't going to go with business as usual thinking Rush, Quis, and Graham are going to fill the void in his run n gun system. Let's see his coaching skills you keep praising him for surface with the present scenario that has been presented with injuries.

Why is it I have more faith in Skiles with his injuries of Redd, Ridnour, and Bogut than I do with JO'B and the Pacers injured players? Neither is in a good situation to say the least, but I see Skiles doing a better job. Maybe it's the different style of games they coach... one emphasizes "D" and the other doesn't. JMOAA

duke dynamite
02-20-2009, 12:10 PM
.... No really I saw an AP guy on PD during a game once.
I see them all the time sitting at the press table.

DgR
02-20-2009, 12:15 PM
Even though Kravitz's columns never enlighten me in any way- they're still important. Not for us fans who keep track of every little thing that happens to the team. His articles are meant for the other thousands of fans who still think the Pacers are the same old group of thugs from a few seasons ago. The fans who are not coming to the games anymore. I'm glad he at least got it right this time.

pacergod2
02-20-2009, 12:15 PM
At what point does The Star get rid of this loser. This is the first time I think I have agreed with the sentiment of one of his articles. But he still goes out of his way to be an overwhelming *******. When will they get a real Pacers fan in there to paint the town Blue and GOLD!?!?! Why not bring in somebody who cares enough to piece together more than four articles a season based loosely on what he heard on ESPN two weeks ago. (And I really get aggravated with ESPN sometimes).

I am officially starting the "Fire Kravitz" club.

naptownmenace
02-20-2009, 12:18 PM
I would love to see Rush out there doing well. However, watching him play offense, I'm often thinking "what was that?". I worry that Rush just doesn't have offensive talent to really contribute. With Hibbert its different. I can see the potential and see the talent. He makes mistakes, but those can be fixed.

Rush really needs to work with that new shot coach. With that athleticism, he might combine an adequate jumper with power to the rim and contribute.

Rush started the season shooting the ball really well. He had a good preseason and he carried that over to the regular season. He hasn't been the same since the bad shooting night against the Clippers (IIRC... maybe it was Philly). Granger was out and he got the start and went 5-21 or something ridiculous like that. He's been out-of-sync offensively ever since.

His defense is still good. He's probably our best perimeter defender on the team and at worse he could be a Bruce Bowen clone. However, he has shown at times that he has good offensive talent and could be a very good player once the game slows down for him and he gets his confidence back.

Granger went through a similar period during his rookie season too. He turned out okay. :D

duke dynamite
02-20-2009, 12:18 PM
At what point does The Star get rid of this loser.
I am officially starting the "Fire Kravitz" club.
They have a reputation of biased, senseless, and uninformative information to uphold. They aren't letting this gem go.

That club was started a loooong time ago, buddy.

pacergod2
02-20-2009, 12:25 PM
How about the "Finally Fire Kravitz in 2009 Fan Club"?

duke dynamite
02-20-2009, 12:32 PM
How about the "Finally Fire Kravitz in 2009 Fan Club"?
:hmm:

Roaming Gnome
02-20-2009, 01:01 PM
At what point does The Star get rid of this loser. This is the first time I think I have agreed with the sentiment of one of his articles. But he still goes out of his way to be an overwhelming *******. When will they get a real Pacers fan in there to paint the town Blue and GOLD!?!?! Why not bring in somebody who cares enough to piece together more than four articles a season based loosely on what he heard on ESPN two weeks ago. (And I really get aggravated with ESPN sometimes).

I am officially starting the "Fire Kravitz" club.

Yikes, that isn't the job of a newspaper columnist!!! The last thing I want is a columnist who's a cheerleader for the team. That's what Conrad and Pacers.com is for. I'd settle for a columnist that knows the local sporting scene which is NBA, NFL, Motor sports, and Local Prep. He/She needs to be objective and fair. Jock the team when they think they are doing well and slap 'em around when they do something that the columnist believes is screwed up. My biggest complaint is that Kravitz seems to come off as a "bomb thrower" (Thanks Peck). If one stance is popular, he'll take the other side of an argument just to stir the pot. To me, it seems less then genuine, but it will get the largest reaction.

Kravitz pretty much nailed this column but, it doesn't stop me from thinking of some of his more "shakey" work involving his knowledge of the NBA. Also, how can you have a columnist that has a very limited knowledge of auto racing when Indy is considered the racing capital of the world?

I'd like for Kravitz to be done here, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon because he's very polarizing and when people talk or gripe about him.... It brings attention to The Star. I only ask that they bring in another columnist for sports, so we can get another perspective and maybe a little banter when Kravitz goes "off the reservation".

Do you guys remember The Stars ad campaign when they brought Kravitz on board at The Star? It was a bunch of folks griping about him, and the billboards about stating, "You're going to love to hate this guy" with his picture. Hating the guy is only going to snug his seat belt for the job. That is what they want.

Peter_sixtyftsixin
02-20-2009, 01:12 PM
I am officially starting the "Fire Kravitz" club.

I already started it. Welcome.

I've actually vowed to stop reading the Star until this clown is gone. Similar to what a lot of people in Chicago did due to Jay Mariotti.

Peter_sixtyftsixin
02-20-2009, 01:14 PM
I see them all the time sitting at the press table.

Maybe we should have a sticky for them. Let them know what they should write about our team.

jeffg-body
02-20-2009, 01:17 PM
Brandon Rush = Basket Case? I don't see that myself. I see Brandon Rush = Rookie

Pacers
02-20-2009, 02:20 PM
Of course Kravitz is going to say this. You know, this is no big surprise that are chances are shot with Danny out on top of Mike and Jeff...

I don't understand how so much can be written over the obvious.

There are a lot of stupid people out there, Duke. Just because it's obvious to most on this board doesn't mean it's obvious to all of The Star's readers. He's basically talking to the idiots who think that just by fielding a team in the East we should be destined for at least the ECFs. The people that think that JOB is a loser and should be fired because we're in the lottery.

Peck
02-20-2009, 02:49 PM
Bob Kravitz wins.

Everytime there is someone talking about something Bob says or writes, he wins.

His job is not to inform, advise or even muse. His goal is to get you talking about him and he is absolutely brilliant in doing this.

indygeezer
02-20-2009, 03:04 PM
:kravitz:
Bob Kravitz wins.

Everytime there is someone talking about something Bob says or writes, he wins.

His job is not to inform, advise or even muse. His goal is to get you talking about him and he is absolutely brilliant in doing this.

:ding: I'll never forget Benner saying on Patricks afternoon radio show "It's all about the pub(licity)." He was responding to a question about the hate mail he got following an article condemning Bob Knight.

grace
02-20-2009, 03:13 PM
I think it is pretty well known that :kravitz: has a pretty poor working knowledge of the anything but hockey (and that's marginal).

Fixed.

grace
02-20-2009, 03:17 PM
Bob Kravitz wins.

Everytime there is someone talking about something Bob says or writes, he wins.

His job is not to inform, advise or even muse. His goal is to get you talking about him and he is absolutely brilliant in doing this.

I'd like to know if Bob really felt like he won when Mark Boyle called him a buffoon on Dan Dakich's radio show. (It might not have been buffoon, but it wasn't complimentary.)

Peck
02-20-2009, 03:27 PM
I'd like to know if Bob really felt like he won when Mark Boyle called him a buffoon on Dan Dakich's radio show. (It might not have been buffoon, but it wasn't complimentary.)

My guess is, yes.

Another program that is talking about Bob Kravits, even if it is not complimentry, is free publicity.

Remember the goal is to have people talk about him, not his knowledge or wisdom.

I'm sure he may be put off by being called a buffoon, but at the end of the day it does nothing but put forward the notion people are talking about him.

count55
02-20-2009, 03:51 PM
My guess is, yes.

Another program that is talking about Bob Kravits, even if it is not complimentry, is free publicity.

Remember the goal is to have people talk about him, not his knowledge or wisdom.

I'm sure he may be put off by being called a buffoon, but at the end of the day it does nothing but put forward the notion people are talking about him.

Odd Kravitz story, on the buffoon trip:

Fall of 2007, on a late weekday afternoon, I'm sitting at the bar of a place be named in my avatar with a couple co-workers. Sitting at a table a few feet away were these guys who'd clearly been out golfing. I recognize one of them to be :kravitz:

There's a Pacer pre-season game that night, and somehow he strikes up a convo with me from that distance. He says that he's supposed to write a story about the Pacers, but he doesn't really feel like going to the game. We chat back and forth a bit, until he comments on who he is (I had not treated him any differently than any guy in a bar), and I tell him, "Yeah, I know."

The things I remember from that evening/next day was that he spent the whole time trying to come up with some excuse not to go the game, and he spent the entire conversation with me basically blatantly ogling my two co-workers, who happened to be attractive 30-ish women.

Effectively, he came off, at least that day, as lazy, obnoxious, and pretty much a pig. (Though, I admit there are days you can find me like that, too.)

Tom White
02-20-2009, 04:29 PM
I think you're taking it the wrong way... at least if you are taking it to mean "nut job" or something similar. I took it to mean Rush has lost his confidence and direction. That he's got butterflies... is a bundle of nerves... isn't sure of himself or his game any longer....etc..

I'll agree with this. I've heard Kravitz use the same term on the radio show, and it sounded to me as though he was not knocking Rush. It sounded more like he was describing a guy that is just frustrated and not sure what to do to get out of his funk. More sympathetic than anything. Think of someone you know that has had something bad happen to them, and you've described them as being a basket case over it.

Trader Joe
02-20-2009, 05:23 PM
Brandon Rush = Basket Case? I don't see that myself. I see Brandon Rush = Rookie

Basically. I guess everyone forgets what Danny looked like when he was a rookie. Too passive on offense, and over thinking every play. Rush is much farther along than Danny was defensively even,

special ed
02-20-2009, 05:37 PM
I only ask that they bring in another columnist for sports, so we can get another perspective and maybe a little banter when Kravitz goes "off the reservation".
Didn't they have that in C Jamaal Horton, who didn't know the difference between a Spartan or a Trojan (HS team) and then hired another guy (Mike Williams, maybe?) who had embellieshed his resume so that he never penned his first column?
The Star is so thin these days, I'll be surprised if the printed form is still around in two years due to this internet thing.

Hicks
02-20-2009, 05:40 PM
I agree, Indy. As bad as he's looked offensively, he's looked pretty good defensively, and when I recall Danny at that time, I can't let myself get to upset with Brandon at this stage.

speakout4
02-20-2009, 06:28 PM
When I saw Brandon at the beginning of the season I saw rookie and now I see Kareem. If anything his jump shot is worse.

grace
02-20-2009, 09:23 PM
The Star is so thin these days, I'll be surprised if the printed form is still around in two years due to this internet thing.

I promise to get a subscription to the printed form if they promise to get rid of :kravitz:.

Peter_sixtyftsixin
02-20-2009, 09:29 PM
I promise to get a subscription to the printed form if they promise to get rid of :kravitz:.

seconded.

madison
02-20-2009, 09:45 PM
Why all the hatred for Kravitz? He gets paid for his opinions which is more than the rest of the PD can say. So, you disagree with him. So what? That doesn't mean our opinions are better than his. He's paid to be controversial. He does just that. Get over it.

New subject. Newspapers are in BIG trouble across the country. Will the Star even be in business at the end of the economic calamity that we're currently in? You don't have to 'fire' Kravitz, just wait for the demise of the medium. It's coming.

sloopjohnb
02-20-2009, 10:37 PM
I am very frightened that I actually agree with almost everything here. :onozomg:

I disagree that any of the Foster deals were lost opportunities because, as far as I can tell, we got nothing "core" from them and Foster is the last player we should trade simply because we could. I understand that many see Foster as a nutritious part of a good breakfast who is bad for you if he is the whole meal, but I think his destiny is to be the bench vet for the Pacers who helps keep the locker room stable and shows an example of a work ethic.

You make a good point with the veteran leadership. Foster coming off the bench is much better than the current role he is filling.

When I think of what the Pacers need to be successful again, I can't help but look at the 90's Pacers as a model for rebuilding this type of team. (There was a post a while back by somebody on PD all about this and it was a great read.) Anyway, teams like Indiana, Utah, Cleveland, etc. have to rebuild through the draft and being on the better side of trades.

The late 90's Pacers free agent signings were often players like Sam Perkins, Byron Scott, Chris Mullin (I think we traded Dampier for Mullin, but I believe he was in on it to play for Bird).

You could say that's where we went wrong with the first rebuild - not having enough veterans. I remember the Pacers were close to signing Jon Barry (or his brother, I can't remember, the better 3pt shooter of the two). O'Neal was pushing for the signing. But it never happened and I think we went and got Sarunus instead.

Keeping a guy like Foster might have been the right idea. I could see him assuming the role of a great motivator coming off the bench.

grace
02-20-2009, 11:41 PM
Why all the hatred for Kravitz? He gets paid for his opinions which is more than the rest of the PD can say. So, you disagree with him. So what? That doesn't mean our opinions are better than his. He's paid to be controversial. He does just that. Get over it.


More importantly why do we get into the same argument every time someone posts one of his articles?

Roaming Gnome
02-21-2009, 12:04 AM
Why all the hatred for Kravitz? He gets paid for his opinions which is more than the rest of the PD can say. So, you disagree with him. So what? That doesn't mean our opinions are better than his. He's paid to be controversial. He does just that.


Our opinions may not be better then his since it is an opinion in nature, but a lot of opinions on here are "more informed" then his. Just reading him sometimes gives the impression that his knowledge of the NBA is very limited.


Get over it.
Is that necessary? Really? You made your point without this garbage. Are you looking for confrontation?

duke dynamite
02-21-2009, 12:41 AM
Get over it.




Is that necessary? Really? You made your point without this garbage. Are you looking for confrontation?
He is just letting us know that he is back. It was very quiet here for a while...

sloopjohnb
02-21-2009, 09:02 AM
I live in Central Florida and we have the Orlando Sentinel. A co-worker of mine was complaining the other day about their sports columnist because he was writing the Magic off for the season after Nelson went down with that injury.

I also don't see the big deal. Especially with this article. It was well-written and had several great points. He rarely writes about the Pacers, if I could complain about anything with Kravitz, that would be my complaint.