PDA

View Full Version : Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz



vnzla81
01-06-2010, 06:39 AM
http://www.indystar.com/article/20100106/SPORTS15/100106007/Pacers-need-Bird-to-take-bold-action

Bob Kravitz


.

OK, Larry Bird.
Your mess, your time to clean it up.


Everybody knows Bird, the Indiana Pacers president, has absolutely no desire to leave his office and coach the motley collection of talent he has cobbled together for this lost 2009-10 season. But he has no real choice, not as his team continues to circle the drain, losing by 20 points, playing with neither pride nor passion.


Tuesday night against Orlando? Yes, an astonishing aberration, a 97-90 victory that came out of nowhere. A career night for Roy Hibbert, who outplayed All-Star Dwight Howard. A solid two-way effort x from Brandon Rush. A glimpse into what-might-be if only the Pacers came to play every night, as opposed to once every five games.


It changes nothing.


Bird needs to fire coach Jim O'Brien now -- even though, truth be told, this isn't completely O'Brien's fault.


Bird needs to install himself as the coach.


His mess, his cleanup.


Larry, bring your ShamWow and some extra bleach. This isn't going to be pleasant.


What are the alternatives? Owner Herb Simon isn't going to let Bird punt O'Brien, who has another year on his contract, and then hire another coach for big bucks. There's nobody on the coaching staff who is viewed as a workable long-term replacement. And staying with O'Brien now isn't -- or shouldn't -- be an option, not with this team mailing it in eight nights out of 10.


Maybe it's a cosmetic change, maybe it qualifies as change-for-change's-sake, but something has to be done as this lost season slides into irrelevance.


This team already has lost by double digits as often as it did all of last season. A 43-point loss at New York? Unforgivable. I don't care if you're undermanned and fatigued. Still, unforgivable.


Let's see if Larry Legend can inspire Rush to do every night what he did Tuesday night. Let's see if Bird can bring T.J. Ford back from the emotional dead after a second straight season of losing his starting job. Let's see if he can continue to feed Hibbert, who has too often gotten lost in O'Brien's up-tempo offense.



Let's not hear about Danny Granger's injury, how Troy Murphy and Jeff Foster have been in and out of the lineup, how Mike Dunleavy has struggled to return to form.


The fact is, the Pacers were 6-12 and strangely listless even when Granger was in the lineup. The eyes don't lie: The Pacers aren't playing with one-third of the energy and passion they displayed the previous two seasons.


Two weeks ago, Bird said O'Brien was going nowhere and if changes were necessary, he would send away his underachieving players -- which would leave him with a roster of, oh, three guys.


While that sounds good -- see, Larry is holding the players accountable instead of pulling the plug on the coach!! -- it's unrealistic. You can punt the coach; you can't punt the players.


Trade them away? Who wants them? Who wants Ford and the $17.million he's owed the next two years? Who wants Dunleavy's knees? Who wants anybody not named Granger?


At least by shaking things up and making a change, Bird removes O'Brien as an excuse to underachieve.


Ultimately, I don't know if this team will suddenly find religion and start playing with purpose if Bird takes over, but something has to be done. Because if not, all you're doing it taking the fans' money and entering the John Wall Sweepstakes.


O'Brien walked into an impossible situation -- think Orlando's Stan Van Gundy made the right call when he turned down the Pacers' job? -- and Bird inherited a dysfunctional mess.


He inherited a bad situation and did a good job jettisoning Jermaine O'Neal's contract. But there have been too many mistakes during the rebuilding process, too many errors for Simon to ignore as he contemplates Bird's future at season's end.


The David Harrison selection. The Sarunas Jasikevicius signing. The Travis Diener signing. The empty draft featuring Shawne Williams and James White. The decision to draft Rush. The choice to let Jarrett Jack walk. And so on.


The long-term plan makes sense: Develop young players and then surround them with expensive free agents in the summer of 2011. Except those young players aren't growing as they should. So either Bird hasn't selected the right players, or his coach hasn't done the job developing them -- which is why the guy who bought the groceries needs to cook the meal.


If Bird can't turn Rush and Hibbert and the others into players, then it can be concluded that Bird missed on those picks, and he's not the executive you want making the big decisions in the future.


Tuesday night was fun, an undermanned team overachieving against long odds, holding the Orlando trio of Howard, Vince Carter and Rashard Lewis to 21 points. But it was a Halley's Comet performance. Bird has to save this thing. And, in the process, save himself.


I agree with Bob on this one.

sportfireman
01-06-2010, 07:36 AM
http://www.indystar.com/article/20100106/SPORTS15/100106007/Pacers-need-Bird-to-take-bold-action

Bob Kravitz


.

OK, Larry Bird.
Your mess, your time to clean it up.


Everybody knows Bird, the Indiana Pacers president, has absolutely no desire to leave his office and coach the motley collection of talent he has cobbled together for this lost 2009-10 season. But he has no real choice, not as his team continues to circle the drain, losing by 20 points, playing with neither pride nor passion.


Tuesday night against Orlando? Yes, an astonishing aberration, a 97-90 victory that came out of nowhere. A career night for Roy Hibbert, who outplayed All-Star Dwight Howard. A solid two-way effort x from Brandon Rush. A glimpse into what-might-be if only the Pacers came to play every night, as opposed to once every five games.

It changes nothing.


Bird needs to fire coach Jim O'Brien now -- even though, truth be told, this isn't completely O'Brien's fault.


Bird needs to install himself as the coach.


His mess, his cleanup.


Larry, bring your ShamWow and some extra bleach. This isn't going to be pleasant.


What are the alternatives? Owner Herb Simon isn't going to let Bird punt O'Brien, who has another year on his contract, and then hire another coach for big bucks. There's nobody on the coaching staff who is viewed as a workable long-term replacement. And staying with O'Brien now isn't -- or shouldn't -- be an option, not with this team mailing it in eight nights out of 10.


Maybe it's a cosmetic change, maybe it qualifies as change-for-change's-sake, but something has to be done as this lost season slides into irrelevance.


This team already has lost by double digits as often as it did all of last season. A 43-point loss at New York? Unforgivable. I don't care if you're undermanned and fatigued. Still, unforgivable.


Let's see if Larry Legend can inspire Rush to do every night what he did Tuesday night. Let's see if Bird can bring T.J. Ford back from the emotional dead after a second straight season of losing his starting job. Let's see if he can continue to feed Hibbert, who has too often gotten lost in O'Brien's up-tempo offense.



Let's not hear about Danny Granger's injury, how Troy Murphy and Jeff Foster have been in and out of the lineup, how Mike Dunleavy has struggled to return to form.


The fact is, the Pacers were 6-12 and strangely listless even when Granger was in the lineup. The eyes don't lie: The Pacers aren't playing with one-third of the energy and passion they displayed the previous two seasons.


Two weeks ago, Bird said O'Brien was going nowhere and if changes were necessary, he would send away his underachieving players -- which would leave him with a roster of, oh, three guys.


While that sounds good -- see, Larry is holding the players accountable instead of pulling the plug on the coach!! -- it's unrealistic. You can punt the coach; you can't punt the players.


Trade them away? Who wants them? Who wants Ford and the $17.million he's owed the next two years? Who wants Dunleavy's knees? Who wants anybody not named Granger?


At least by shaking things up and making a change, Bird removes O'Brien as an excuse to underachieve.


Ultimately, I don't know if this team will suddenly find religion and start playing with purpose if Bird takes over, but something has to be done. Because if not, all you're doing it taking the fans' money and entering the John Wall Sweepstakes.


O'Brien walked into an impossible situation -- think Orlando's Stan Van Gundy made the right call when he turned down the Pacers' job? -- and Bird inherited a dysfunctional mess.


He inherited a bad situation and did a good job jettisoning Jermaine O'Neal's contract. But there have been too many mistakes during the rebuilding process, too many errors for Simon to ignore as he contemplates Bird's future at season's end.


The David Harrison selection. The Sarunas Jasikevicius signing. The Travis Diener signing. The empty draft featuring Shawne Williams and James White. The decision to draft Rush. The choice to let Jarrett Jack walk. And so on.


The long-term plan makes sense: Develop young players and then surround them with expensive free agents in the summer of 2011. Except those young players aren't growing as they should. So either Bird hasn't selected the right players, or his coach hasn't done the job developing them -- which is why the guy who bought the groceries needs to cook the meal.


If Bird can't turn Rush and Hibbert and the others into players, then it can be concluded that Bird missed on those picks, and he's not the executive you want making the big decisions in the future.


Tuesday night was fun, an undermanned team overachieving against long odds, holding the Orlando trio of Howard, Vince Carter and Rashard Lewis to 21 points. But it was a Halley's Comet performance. Bird has to save this thing. And, in the process, save himself.


I agree with Bob on this one.

how is he praising rush and calling him a busted draft pick all in the same article???:confused: give rush a chance he's only in his 2nd year. and at this point i don't think a coaching change would help too much. but i agree jim needs to go........NOW!!!!!

IndyPacer
01-06-2010, 07:37 AM
He makes some good points here, but Kravitz also tries (once again) to play the "hindsight genius" with things like the David Harrison pick (wasn't he at the end of the 1st round; expecting a franchise player there?) or Sarunas not panning out (other teams were quite interested in him as well), which is why I absolutely can't stand him. What about getting Granger and Hibbert with mid-1st round picks? AJ Price could also turn into a steal. There are major things Bird needs to sort out, which includes the coaching and underachieving situation, but there have been some very positive moves by Bird as well, especially regarding cleaning out the behavior problem players.

hoopsforlife
01-06-2010, 07:45 AM
The irony of Sarunas, as I see it, is he would have fit into JOB's system extremely well. Up tempo, no apparent organization, 3 point shots and a tall active inside player is what SJ needed for success. He just didn't have it under Carlisle.

nerveghost
01-06-2010, 08:06 AM
This is what bugs me about the article - from what I hear and see, Bird appears to have some real back problems that would not suit the lifestyle of an NBA coach. I would like to know if A) that is the case, and B) if Kravitz knows this and called him out anyway to coach.

Speed
01-06-2010, 08:11 AM
Yesthecabbageis couldn't bring the ball up the court under pressure and couldn't guard anyone, sorry, but that was a miss. Not a club altering one, but still a miss.

Bird hasn't been perfect, but I think all of the salary cap crap was not his doing or that's my impression. That is the thing they are still paying for, that and the other thing (not mentioning it) is the reason for all of the problems they have now.

Bird made mistakes, but not big ones. And he's made some very nice moves as well, imo.

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 08:13 AM
It looks to me like Kravitz wrote this a couple days ago, then Orlando happened. Oops.

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 08:19 AM
I've voted no for replacing O'Brien.

I don't think he's a bad coach. I think he's stubborn. (Okay, his stubbornness can make him bad.)

But, with last night's game providing some hope, I'm thinking that JOB may finally get it: that Roy is in fact a game changer, that he needs to move toward more of a halfcourt offense, that the personnel that is bringing him more defense and more wins needs to stay out on the floor.

If JOB can get over this stubborn streak and turn over a new leaf, then I am willing to see him stay on as coach.

duke dynamite
01-06-2010, 08:28 AM
Yeah, this article was written around Sunday night, early to mid yesterday. I was forewarned about this article.

Kravitz only shows up to a few games a season and is never at any practices. He sees the stat lines and reads what Mike Wells writes in his Insider Blogs.

Shame on you, Bob. Way to be a journalist.

Bball
01-06-2010, 08:37 AM
I've voted no for replacing O'Brien.

I don't think he's a bad coach. I think he's stubborn. (Okay, his stubbornness can make him bad.)

But, with last night's game providing some hope, I'm thinking that JOB may finally get it: that Roy is in fact a game changer, that he needs to move toward more of a halfcourt offense, that the personnel is bringing him more defense and more wins needs to stay out on the floor.

If JOB can get over this stubborn streak and turn over a new leaf, then I am willing to see him stay on as coach.

It's just a temporary thing. He will put Murphy back into big minutes just as soon as he can... and he will run home to his uptempo offense and defensive lip service at the same time. Unless Bird forces him to go this direction, we've already been down this road before. We know how the story ends.

I'm not sure I want him replaced though. He never should've started the season, but now that he has, I think we should let him help in the lottery sweepstakes. My concern is, we've had too many lost seasons in a row where we should've done that (played for the lottery and player development). Instead we've tried to overachieve our way into the playoffs (of a weak conference) to the point we've hurt ourselves in the long term more than helped and ultimately put ourselves in this position where the Pacers could end up in another city/state.

If we need ticket sales to start heading the other direction then either O'Brien needs his hand forced to go away from his preferred offense and defense (and players) or else we need a coaching change just to give some red meat to the masses. As well as signal to all of Pacerdom that the status quo was not an acceptable product.

I do think the diehards will understand a youth movement and even a lottery run with the light at the end of the tunnel of both. I think it's underestimating them to not believe that. But I don't know if the franchise can withstand another lost season in the midst of the current franchise negotiations and current economic climate.

Bball
01-06-2010, 08:39 AM
Oh... and under no circumstances should O'Brien remain the coach one day past the final day of the season....

owl
01-06-2010, 08:48 AM
I think Bob gets all his ideas from reading PD. I guess that to a certain extent is a complement to the posters here. It would be nice if we read something with more depth and
presented some idea based on info we cannot readily see.
I really see little point in dumping OBrien during the season. It would be a waste of money
and probably the waste of another coach who came in.

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 08:52 AM
It's just a temporary thing. He will put Murphy back into big minutes just as soon as he can... and he will run home to his uptempo offense and defensive lip service at the same time. Unless Bird forces him to go this direction, we've already been down this road before. We know how the story ends.

I fear the same thing. But I'm hoping against hope.

I wouldn't have thought he would completely bench TJ, but he did. That gives me a glimmer of hope. (Btw, why does JOB go from starters minutes to complete benching? Does he not have the ability to be moderate? Kinda nutty.)


I'm not sure I want him replaced though. He never should've started the season, but now that he has, I think we should let him help in the lottery sweepstakes. My concern is, we've had too many lost seasons in a row where we should've done that (played for the lottery and player development). Instead we've tried to overachieve our way into the playoffs (of a weak conference) to the point we've hurt ourselves in the long term more than helped and ultimately put ourselves in this position where the Pacers could end up in another city/state.

I think you may be contradicting yourself here. Do you want JOB as coach so we'll continue to tank? Do you want him to develop the young players? (you say he won't).

One or the other.

I guess you could be saying: Bird should mandate he plays the youngins, and with JOB as coach we will be sure to tank.

I think it would be easier to just fire him and have a replacement that is sure to develop young players.

I'm sticking with my hope that JOB may finally see the light. And in his own intemperate way will go from playing Troy 35 mpg to putting him in street clothes with a dunce cap and choke collar.

owl
01-06-2010, 09:05 AM
It's just a temporary thing. He will put Murphy back into big minutes just as soon as he can... and he will run home to his uptempo offense and defensive lip service at the same time. Unless Bird forces him to go this direction, we've already been down this road before. We know how the story ends.



If Murphy comes back to big minutes you can count on the top 5 pick range. Also I wounder if this is approved by Bird to help get that high pick or in order to promote Murphy to other teams in the league.

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 09:11 AM
If Murphy comes back to big minutes you can count on the top 5 pick range. Also I wounder if this is approved by Bird to help get that high pick or in order to promote Murphy to other teams in the league.

This gets interesting and complex.

Because it appears that this could be going from the actual negative impact Troy brings to line up to the perhaps bigger psychological impact he makes on several other players.

It's not a stretch to believe that several players think pretty similarly to the five game win streak club here on the forum. So that means, as soon as Murph gets put in the game, the several players we have from stellar coaching regimes like Duke, NC, Kansas and Georgetown—who all know what good basketball looks like—have the wind taken out of their psychological sails. I know it happens to me, and I'm just watching TV.

graphic-er
01-06-2010, 09:12 AM
2-3 weeks ago I would have said fire JOB and have Bird coach, but now that the season is getting out of hand, even though we are only 3 games out of the playoffs. I say let JOB finish out the year. If Bird has a 3 year plan to shed contracts and bring in a big FA, then honestly the performance of this team is according to plan. You aren't going to lure a Big FA here just with Granger alone, so getting a top 5 pick who can come in and be a difference maker is priority #1 for me. If you get that pick in the upcoming draft then come out next season and really show alot of promise, make the playoffs. You'll get some attention from FA. No big name FA wants to go to a team of losers. So if you are going to pick a year to be absolutely terrible, this is the year to do it in regards to the 3 year plan. I'd so say that picking a good head coach to go along with your top 5 rookie is a good idea too.

Tom White
01-06-2010, 09:21 AM
He makes some good points here, but Kravitz also tries (once again) to play the "hindsight genius" with things like the David Harrison pick (wasn't he at the end of the 1st round; expecting a franchise player there?) or Sarunas not panning out (other teams were quite interested in him as well), which is why I absolutely can't stand him. What about getting Granger and Hibbert with mid-1st round picks? AJ Price could also turn into a steal. There are major things Bird needs to sort out, which includes the coaching and underachieving situation, but there have been some very positive moves by Bird as well, especially regarding cleaning out the behavior problem players.

With Harrison, I imagine he is talking about not doing their homework in looking at his character, and mental make-up.

Sarunas may have been looked at by other teams prior to signing with the Pacers, but past that point no one was interested. What teams are clamoring for him now?

graphic-er
01-06-2010, 09:23 AM
Yeah, this article was written around Sunday night, early to mid yesterday. I was forewarned about this article.

Kravitz only shows up to a few games a season and is never at any practices. He sees the stat lines and reads what Mike Wells writes in his Insider Blogs.

Shame on you, Bob. Way to be a journalist.

This is truth, he admits as much on the Radio when ever anything is said about the Pacers, he is clueless and admits he doesn't really follow the Pacers.

graphic-er
01-06-2010, 09:26 AM
With Harrison, I imagine he is talking about not doing their homework in looking at his character, and mental make-up.


Yes but that is what you get with a project player at the bottom of the first round. Talented guy who isn't the full package, if he was the full package we would have been drafted earlier.

Bball
01-06-2010, 09:32 AM
I think you may be contradicting yourself here. Do you want JOB as coach so we'll continue to tank? Do you want him to develop the young players? (you say he won't).

One or the other.



I don't think O'Brien will develop young players unless forced to. I think he'll run home to his preferred 125-124 basketball attempt just as quickly as he can. And I think that will get us in lottery land. I'm thinking more about next year and a new coach developing the young players.

Of course if O'Brien makes it to next season then that really will take the wind out of my sails.

I'm conflicted on the firing him idea. I'm worried that about any replacement coach will be able to do better after a couple of weeks. All of a sudden we'll be in the hunt for the 8th playoff spot.

I just don't think that is a good place to be in with this team. I could be wrong... maybe with someone else stirring the drink the pieces start fitting and all of a sudden FA upgrades will look like the way to go.

I'm not totally down on Murphy. I think he does exactly what O'Brien wants. The question is-is that all he can do? The second question is- What does it tell you about O'Brien if Murphy is giving him what he wants on the court?

It at least tells me all of O'Brien's talk about defense is just that- talk.

BillS
01-06-2010, 09:33 AM
First, I called Bob's paragraph on the Orlando game last night when Duke told me the article was coming. Way to dismiss a data point that doesn't fit into your neatly packaged data there, Bob.

Bob isn't wrong, he just oversimplifies. I can read comments from any number of uninformed Indy Star readers for that.

To name Diener as one of Bird's major blunders is pushing it, I think.

duke dynamite
01-06-2010, 09:34 AM
This is truth, he admits as much on the Radio when ever anything is said about the Pacers, he is clueless and admits he doesn't really follow the Pacers.

That doesn't justify his opinion, though. Even though you admit ignorance still doesn't mean what you say is any more credible.

This is the time of year where he should be rippin' on the Colts. After that come to a few practices then I may actually buy into what he spoon-feeds the ignorant masses.

count55
01-06-2010, 09:35 AM
With Harrison, I imagine he is talking about not doing their homework in looking at his character, and mental make-up.

Everybody knew he was something of a bonehead. That's why he was available at 29. This was pre-brawl, and they had just gone to the Conference Finals, largely with a collection of talented boneheads. They took a flyer on the size and talent.

It's not that they made a mistake in understanding his character and mental make-up. It's that they deluded themselves into thinking that they still had a good locker room, when that probably hadn't been true since 2000.


Sarunas may have been looked at by other teams prior to signing with the Pacers, but past that point no one was interested. What teams are clamoring for him now?

Cleveland was sure they had him signed (and were quite disappointed when they lost him), and I believe (but I'm not sure) that Utah had pursued him pretty heavily.

Of course, this only proves that Bird wasn't the only one who was wrong about Saras.

count55
01-06-2010, 09:37 AM
First, I called Bob's paragraph on the Orlando game last night when Duke told me the article was coming. Way to dismiss a data point that doesn't fit into your neatly packaged data there, Bob.

Bob isn't wrong, he just oversimplifies. I can read comments from any number of uninformed Indy Star readers for that.

To name Diener as one of Bird's major blunders is pushing it, I think.

I think if they had a do-over on Diener, they probably would have tried to get the third year to be a team option (or gone, altogether.) However, they basically got their money's worth out of him the first two years.

Unclebuck
01-06-2010, 09:38 AM
First, I called Bob's paragraph on the Orlando game last night when Duke told me the article was coming. Way to dismiss a data point that doesn't fit into your neatly packaged data there, Bob.

Bob isn't wrong, he just oversimplifies. I can read comments from any number of uninformed Indy Star readers for that.

To name Diener as one of Bird's major blunders is pushing it, I think.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly especially about Diener. Seemed like Bob was reaching for concrete Bird mistakes and had to throw Travis in there to try and bolster his point.

Yeah on Harrison - I thought he was a wacko, but taking him at 29 was a good pick - worth a chance on a big guy who had some athleticism and some skills. So another reach there Bob

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 09:39 AM
I think if they had a do-over on Diener, they probably would have tried to get the third year to be a team option (or gone, altogether.) However, they basically got their money's worth out of him the first two years.

yeah, small potatoes.

You could argue that Walsh handed Bird about fifty to seventy-five Dieners.

Hicks
01-06-2010, 09:52 AM
I am beyond tired of no-nothing's getting their loud mouths heard by masses of people. I almost feel sick that there are people among the masses who won't know better and will now believe what is being preached by this "journalist."

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 09:57 AM
I am beyond tired of no-nothing's getting their loud mouths heard by masses of people. I almost feel sick that there are people among the masses who won't know better and will now believe what is being preached by this "journalist."

"I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all."

—Ecclesiastes 9:11

Anthem
01-06-2010, 10:01 AM
The irony of Sarunas, as I see it, is he would have fit into JOB's system extremely well.
No, he wouldn't. Any system where he had to face NBA defenders with NBA rules is a system where he'd be a liability on both ends of the floor.

duke dynamite
01-06-2010, 10:04 AM
Well call me a monkey riding a dog. I misread the thread title and assumed it said "pacers need bird to take action against bob kravitz." I revoke my poll choice and check No.

McKeyFan
01-06-2010, 10:07 AM
Well call me a monkey riding a dog. I misread the thread title and assumed it said "pacers need bird to take action against bob kravitz." I revoke my poll choice and check No.

Nice work, vnzla81. You can take Conrad's place. ;)

duke dynamite
01-06-2010, 10:27 AM
Nice work, vnzla81. You can take Conrad's place. ;)
Curses, small iPhone screen!

PacerGuy
01-06-2010, 10:37 AM
Krapvitz is an idiot, & is not even remotely interested in the Pacers or the NBA! He is constantly wrong when speaking about players (strengths/weaknesses, sometimes even their names!), contracts, drafts/signings,... He admits as much when confronted w/ facts on his show, yet he expects to be taken seriously & as one w/ knowledge when he writes an article like this. Unbelievable!!!...Unacceptable!!!
Even the parts where he does find a valid point (thanks to two hands & Eddie holding his flashlight), he almost always contradicts or discredits the point he was making as he gets lost in the tornado of bull ****** he's writing. BK is an uninformed, pot-stiring blow-hard who is clueless on anything that wears, resembles, works for, or routs for the Blue & Gold.

As for JO'B...
I do not see the point in firing the guy now. We have 1.5 yrs to pay the man, & I'm not sure who is out there that we can bring in worth eating that. JO'B is a compitent coach, & his style/ choices can be changed by LB pulling the trigger on a trade or two (Murph, ?) & forcing JO'B to win w/ what he's got. Change his Options, Change his Choices - no need to p*** away a few million by bring in another coach now. Wait & get who you wnt, when you want them!
See, I don't blame JO'B. He is doing what all coaches try to do & must do to saty in the NBA, & that's win & "win now". History shows you win w/ veterans, not youth. We all here are looking 1-3 yrs down the road, but that is not what an NBA coach can afford to do, they are lucky if they can look 1-3 games ahead, unless your name is P.Jackson or J.Sloan. Besides, LB is not coming out of his office to coach this team! LB is a coach for a veteran team, not a rebuilding team. LB has health issues (back), & he would have no desire to put in the time & effort needed to coach again, IMO.
Personally I would like to see us really look @ Mark Jackson. He is a young guy, a student of the game, a fan favotite, & a true leader. He would be great working w/ young PG's (Price, draft?) & has experience playing w/ a dominate big (Ewing, Smitts). I think MJ would welcome an up-tempo "request" from LB, but would be very comfortable running a half-court offense as well. Mark has no coaching experience, so his price tag should be in reach, & he would need a solid group of assistants, but IMO that is something LB knows a thing or two about & could help him out w/ that.

JayRedd
01-06-2010, 10:53 AM
I think if they had a do-over on Diener, they probably would have tried to get the third year to be a team option (or gone, altogether.) However, they basically got their money's worth out of him the first two years.

You can't give a guy of Diener's talent level a player option. You just can't.

He was a nobody coming from doing nothing and there were no other major bidders. You offer him two years. If you really like him and need to sweeten the long-term thing then you offer a team option third year as a motivational incentive for him to play well during his first 164 games.

If he asks for a player option you laugh and hang up. You can't give a fringe D-League guy influence over your cap number 24 months after the day you make the decision to take a flier on him in the first place.

We're talking about a low, low salary, so it's not franchise-altering or even all that cap-significant, but it does represent a terrible negotiation and shows a lack of fiscal discipline and laissez-faire approach your team's future cap number — which is almost as bad a quality for a GM these days as not being able to recognize talent.

Justin Tyme
01-06-2010, 10:57 AM
The irony of Sarunas, as I see it, is he would have fit into JOB's system extremely well. Up tempo, no apparent organization, 3 point shots and a tall active inside player is what SJ needed for success. He just didn't have it under Carlisle.


You really must have a short memory about Cabbages. He couldn't get the ball up court, so how could he have fit well in Jimmy's system as the PG? Please don't say as a SG, we saw how that didn't work as well.

Kegboy
01-06-2010, 11:05 AM
Where's the write-in option for Dan Burke? Shoot, he's been here long enough, might as well let him have the big chair.

ChicagoJ
01-06-2010, 11:07 AM
Yeah on Harrison - I thought he was a wacko, but taking him at 29 was a good pick - worth a chance on a big guy who had some athleticism and some skills. So another reach there Bob

The only mistake on Harrison was that - when he proved that he really was mentally unstable they should have released him. His talent was worth the gamble at #29. He just couldn't keep his head on straight long enough to stay on the court and demonstrate that talent.

Just like the problem with the JO trade was not "acquiring Ford's contract" but rather holding on to Ford for too long, the same can be said for David.

How many #29 picks are out of the league in three years? A: Most of them.

I agree with Bob overall (I wonder where Bob got the idea? let's check the PD archives... :devil: ), but his examples were weak.

Anthem
01-06-2010, 11:08 AM
You really must have a short memory about Cabbages. He couldn't get the ball up court
That wasn't REALLY the problem with Sarunas. AJ couldn't beat the trap either... he worked on it and got better.

The problem with Runi is that he assumed he was a finished product, ready to win NBA ballgames. His problems were never HIS problems, they were the team or the coach or the system or the American style of play.

Sarunas never improved. That's not gonna get you wins (or even PT) in the NBA.

Tom White
01-06-2010, 11:21 AM
Yes but that is what you get with a project player at the bottom of the first round. Talented guy who isn't the full package, if he was the full package we would have been drafted earlier.

That may be true. There are exceptions, but true enough. However, in this case the "isn't the full package" applies to the player's mental make up. The emotional instabilities that we all saw, and the off-court bad decisions.

I DO THINK, however, that TPTB saw Harrison as the best center prospect available to them, and decided it was (at that position in the draft) not a huge loss if it did not pan out.

count55
01-06-2010, 11:27 AM
You can't give a guy of Diener's talent level a player option. You just can't.

He was a nobody coming from doing nothing and there were no other major bidders. You offer him two years. If you really like him and need to sweeten the long-term thing then you offer a team option third year as a motivational incentive for him to play well during his first 164 games.

If he asks for a player option you laugh and hang up. You can't give a fringe D-League guy influence over your cap number 24 months after the day you make the decision to take a flier on him in the first place.

We're talking about a low, low salary, so it's not franchise-altering or even all that cap-significant, but it does represent a terrible negotiation and shows a lack of fiscal discipline and laissez-faire approach your team's future cap number — which is almost as bad a quality for a GM these days as not being able to recognize talent.

Fair point. They have shown some signs of "Buck Fever," with this signing and, arguably, with Dahntay's.

Something to watch once they have real $$$'s. Not the most encouraging sign.

Hicks
01-06-2010, 11:46 AM
We're talking about a low, low salary, so it's not franchise-altering or even all that cap-significant,

Which is the primary point.


but it does represent a terrible negotiation and shows a lack of fiscal discipline and laissez-faire approach your team's future cap number — which is almost as bad a quality for a GM these days as not being able to recognize talent.

When it's small fry like this, throwing in something like a player option to ensure you got what you wanted is insignificant. I don't think terrible is a word I would ever use in this situation.

If they throw a bunch of money at a guy I'm not sure we'll want around for a long time, and they give that guy a player option, I'll feel differently.

Justin Tyme
01-06-2010, 12:01 PM
That wasn't REALLY the problem with Sarunas. AJ couldn't beat the trap either... he worked on it and got better.

The problem with Runi is that he assumed he was a finished product, ready to win NBA ballgames. His problems were never HIS problems, they were the team or the coach or the system or the American style of play.

Sarunas never improved. That's not gonna get you wins (or even PT) in the NBA.



But if you can't get the ball the up the court and over the line in Jimmy's system in the time frame he wants, what worth does Cabbages have playing PG for JO'B?? My post was in answering why Cabbages wouldn't fit in Jimmy's system.

Yes, Cabbage's attitude was a major problem with him, BUT as a PG if he couldn't get the ball up the court when pressured it makes him pretty worthless in Jimmy's system. Oh, he could fit in with Jimmy if you judged him only on being able to shoot the 3 and not play "D". :D

vnzla81
01-06-2010, 12:12 PM
Fair point. They have shown some signs of "Buck Fever," with this signing and, arguably, with Dahntay's.

Something to watch once they have real $$$'s. Not the most encouraging sign.

this is the reason why I want them to make some trades with the expiring contracts, instead of waiting until they get all that cap space and then see them over paying for players just like Detroit did this year.

ChicagoJ
01-06-2010, 12:17 PM
There's that old proverb or parabel that you must earn trust with the little things before you can be trusted with the big things.

Its not that Deiner's and Dahntay's contracts are going to break the team, its that Bird & Company hasn't shown the ability to take care of details on the small contracts, so why should we believe they can handle the details on the big contracts?

CableKC
01-06-2010, 12:22 PM
It's just a temporary thing. He will put Murphy back into big minutes just as soon as he can... and he will run home to his uptempo offense and defensive lip service at the same time. Unless Bird forces him to go this direction, we've already been down this road before. We know how the story ends.
I'm with you.....when it comes to JO'B....when given little to no choice ( like right now due to injuries to 3 of our key Players ) he will be forced to do things that he's not comfortable doing ( like playing the young, athletic and/or energetic Players ). But IF AND WHEN everyone returns and he is given more options to play Players, I think that he will always default to doing what he is most comfortable with. Unfortunately; this would mean that we'll see Murphy, Dunleavy, Granger and Foster finish games or something that makes little sense to us.

However, to JO'Bs credit....the only move that I have seen him make that doesn't seem like a "comfort" move is the decision to bench Ford in favor of Price. With the revelation that the FO has been trying to move Ford for the last year or so, you'd have to wonder whether Ford getting all the minutes at the start of the season ( despite his dreaded +/- ) was something that was decided upon by Bird/JO'B to try to "showcase" Ford at the obvious expense of Price.

As you said.....unless Bird forces him to continue this trend....like everything else JO'B does and says......when I see him do something that he says he would do, I will believe it...until then, I'm not going to hold my breath.

On a related note....I think that Wells speculates that Murphy will likely return in the next 2 games against the TWolves or the Thunder on the Road. I wouldn't be surprised if Murphy returns to playing a good # of minutes in the Frontcourt....the only real question is whether McRoberts/Solo are going to return to street clothing at the end of the bench or not. My hope is that Bird recognizes over the last couple of games that our offense/defense functions better with more athleticsm and that McRoberts/Solo ( along with Players like Head and AJ ) have earned a minimal # of minutes per game.

Peck
01-06-2010, 01:09 PM
Yeah, this article was written around Sunday night, early to mid yesterday. I was forewarned about this article.

Kravitz only shows up to a few games a season and is never at any practices. He sees the stat lines and reads what Mike Wells writes in his Insider Blogs.

Shame on you, Bob. Way to be a journalist.


I know this is a waste of time but I feel compelled to state it anyway.

Bob is NOT a journalist. He is a commentator, there is a HUGE differance.

His job is not to report on a subject his job is to say something about the subject and the more outlandish the better reaction he will get.

That is why every single time he makes a Pacers post and someone on here loses their mind over it I come on and state the Bob wins. If you have ever seen the Howard Stern movie you know what I'm talking about. People who like him look to read him, people who don't like him read him more. Why, they want to see what he writes next.

Now feel free to criticize his comments though because in this case his commentary is useless and dated. Like was pointed above this really should have ran on Monday's star, not after Tuesday's game.

duke dynamite
01-06-2010, 01:30 PM
I know this is a waste of time but I feel compelled to state it anyway.

Bob is NOT a journalist. He is a commentator, there is a HUGE differance.

His job is not to report on a subject his job is to say something about the subject and the more outlandish the better reaction he will get.

That is why every single time he makes a Pacers post and someone on here loses their mind over it I come on and state the Bob wins. If you have ever seen the Howard Stern movie you know what I'm talking about. People who like him look to read him, people who don't like him read him more. Why, they want to see what he writes next.

Now feel free to criticize his comments though because in this case his commentary is useless and dated. Like was pointed above this really should have ran on Monday's star, not after Tuesday's game.
I understand that, and I am aware. This isn't the first time you've said it.

My only problem is that he is never at any practices, hardly at any games, and yet he has an opinion. A strong one at that. If he were to just take the time to get more involved his harsh tone or whatever would be a little more justified than it is now. Since the majority of the readers of the Star doesn't know that they eat every word up.

Peck
01-06-2010, 01:35 PM
I understand that, and I am aware. This isn't the first time you've said it.
My only problem is that he is never at any practices, hardly at any games, and yet he has an opinion. A strong one at that. If he were to just take the time to get more involved his harsh tone or whatever would be a little more just than it is now.

Yet you called him a journalist anyway.:D

You are holding him to a standard that I wonder if you hold a lot of bloggers or web commentators to? I would guess that most of them don't attend practice and very few of them attend games yet they have opinions as well.

I think once again even though you are admitting you know differantly that you are holding him to the standard of a journalist.

duke dynamite
01-06-2010, 01:37 PM
Yet you called him a journalist anyway.:D

You are holding him to a standard that I wonder if you hold a lot of bloggers or web commentators to? I would guess that most of them don't attend practice and very few of them attend games yet they have opinions as well.

I think once again even though you are admitting you know differantly that you are holding him to the standard of a journalist.
Eh, I used the wrong word. :D

The only difference is that I don't read any blogs. Heck, up until Mike Wells told me last night to read his I didn't even read that one. I'm only opinionated on what I see. I can't complain about anyone else because I don't pay attention to them.

Will Galen
01-06-2010, 01:40 PM
This is truth, he admits as much on the Radio when ever anything is said about the Pacers, he is clueless and admits he doesn't really follow the Pacers.

If true, he's even worse than I thought he was! One, clueless people shouldn't be spewing solutions.

Two, he's a sports writer, and he's been in Indy for several years, and he's still clueless about the Pacers, WHY?

Bob can write because I've seen him write good columns. However, most everything he writes about the Pacers is regurgitated tripe from Pacers Digest.

Unlike Well's who is getting better, Bob is mailing it in where the Pacers are concerned.

the jaddler
01-06-2010, 01:48 PM
i think that its appernt that Kravitz isnt making a very informed opionion there for making himself not credible. i dont nessicarly agree or disagree with him.....but i think if he is going to be so harsh with his words he really need some hard evidence to back it up.

Now i agree that JOB has got to go....but when is that proper time....i dont think now is it, he has allready help start us off to a bad season(minus last night). maybe this is all part of birds 3 year plan....maybe its not.

i think we should just sit on it for now....let JOB finish the season.....we are allready paying him....get or top 5 pick and at the end of the season say goodbye!

pacergod2
01-06-2010, 03:47 PM
If this dude has such strong words, why not set up a cage match between he and Larry Bird? I would love to see what Kravitz has to say once they get in a caged circle and has no where to go. He is a coward of truth and a martyr of ignorance. Who cares what he says honestly. I have yet to read anything he has written that appeals to me.

cdash
01-06-2010, 04:05 PM
His crappy "journalism" and weak arguments aside, the main point is not exactly a bad idea. The players have quit on Obie, and Bird could get at least some sort of effort out of these players. I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell that it actually happens, but I can't say I wouldn't like to see it.

Roaming Gnome
01-06-2010, 07:08 PM
I am beyond tired of no-nothing's getting their loud mouths heard by masses of people. I almost feel sick that there are people among the masses who won't know better and will now believe what is being preached by this "journalist."

That's my thought, exactly... I really don't care about what Kravie has to say, but I do get steamed when I think of how he's taken as someone with a working knowledge of the NBA.

speakout4
01-06-2010, 07:23 PM
I understand that, and I am aware. This isn't the first time you've said it.

My only problem is that he is never at any practices, hardly at any games, and yet he has an opinion. A strong one at that. If he were to just take the time to get more involved his harsh tone or whatever would be a little more justified than it is now. Since the majority of the readers of the Star doesn't know that they eat every word up.
Bill Benner the guy before Kravitz did the exact same thing. It's called selling newspapers.

ksuttonjr76
01-06-2010, 07:46 PM
i think that its appernt that Kravitz isnt making a very informed opionion there for making himself not credible. i dont nessicarly agree or disagree with him.....but i think if he is going to be so harsh with his words he really need some hard evidence to back it up.

Now i agree that JOB has got to go....but when is that proper time....i dont think now is it, he has allready help start us off to a bad season(minus last night). maybe this is all part of birds 3 year plan....maybe its not.

i think we should just sit on it for now....let JOB finish the season.....we are allready paying him....get or top 5 pick and at the end of the season say goodbye!

And don't even kiss goodnight either!

PacerGuy
01-06-2010, 10:44 PM
For all those who say Fire JO'B now or at season's end is missing ol' Krapvitz point - He wants Bird to coach out JO'B's contract, meaning for the next 1 1/2 yrs. He knows the team can not take on the financial responsibility to pay another coach, so he is saying it is better to go on w/o JO'B w/ NO replacement (while still paying him) then it is to keep & use both.
The biggest flaw in his logic (that I challenged him on today's show with) is if he were to get his way, we would be diluting LB's job focus as GM during what is likely to be the most important & critical 18-20 months this franchise has ever had. We need LB focused on his GM role in using our assets (expiring's, picks) to acquire the talent this team will need to start becoming a winner again. Pulling LB onto the bench does not help that - it hurts that. If LB changes the personnel, he changes JO'B's coaching options. This is what LB's job is, making personnel decisions now, not coaching - & like it or not, until JO'B's contract is up he is here to stay.

MikeDC
01-07-2010, 01:01 AM
Larry Bird sticking a sharp object in Bob Kravitz would count as bold action.

ChicagoJ
01-07-2010, 12:15 PM
Bill Benner the guy before Kravitz did the exact same thing. It's called selling newspapers.

And Robin Miller.

And Ron Cook in Pittsburgh.

Jay Mariotti and a few other clowns in Chicago.

Jim Rome.

The list is long, and not limited to newspapers. Or even sports.

Its not like Rush Limbaugh or Keith Olberman are trying to get all the facts right on either side of an issue either, they just want to get people worked up enough that they come back for more. They're entertainers. And when some of you over-react to anything (and everything) that Kravitz says and does, then the rest of us are entertained. Except that you're almost too predictable to be entertaining.

Commentator (columnist) and Journalist are not the same thing.

NuffSaid
01-07-2010, 12:17 PM
For all those who say Fire JO'B now or at season's end is missing ol' Krapvitz point - He wants Bird to coach out JO'B's contract, meaning for the next 1 1/2 yrs. He knows the team can not take on the financial responsibility to pay another coach, so he is saying it is better to go on w/o JO'B w/ NO replacement (while still paying him) then it is to keep & use both.
The biggest flaw in his logic (that I challenged him on today's show with) is if he were to get his way, we would be diluting LB's job focus as GM during what is likely to be the most important & critical 18-20 months this franchise has ever had. We need LB focused on his GM role in using our assets (expiring's, picks) to acquire the talent this team will need to start becoming a winner again. Pulling LB onto the bench does not help that - it hurts that. If LB changes the personnel, he changes JO'B's coaching options. This is what LB's job is, making personnel decisions now, not coaching - & like it or not, until JO'B's contract is up he is here to stay.
My immediate assessment of Kravitz' artile was "overly melo dramatic". The guy's always so over the top on everything he writes about. And everything has to be such gloom and doom. It really doesn't matter how right (or wrong) he may be. His commentary is always so gloomy, but sometimes you just can't help reading his articles. It's like that training wreck...you know you should just drive right on by, but you can't help looking anyway.

Bird is not going to come back to coach this team. He has stated such on several occasions; not going to happen. I think he and JOB have discussed things and have agreed to try going in a different direction. Hence, the reason we don't see TJ out there, and have begun to see more of the younger players get minutes, i.e., McRoberts, Solo, AJ and even Luther. There's a difference between players who come in and play the game just to play it versus those guys who come in with a chip on their shoulders and play with swagger (attitude...confidence...desire...a yearning to perform well and play the game the right way). Veterans like Watson and Head are hungry for wins. Guys like Dunleavy are desperate for wins. Guys like TJ probably just want to play...collect a paycheck and go home. Okay, so I don't know that for sure. However, I mention these three contrasting mentalities to make a point:

How someone approaches the game depends greatly on what attitude they bring to the court. You can clearly tell who wants to do better and who really wants to win based on what they do on the court and their body language while on the sidelines. The former is very telling whether the Pacers win or lose. Just watch Roy Hibbert, for example. He's up and rooting his teammates on every time one of them makes a good play. To him, it's not about how the game ends (though I'm sure he hopes for a victory), but rather how each individual including himself performs from one possession to the next. I'm sure that in his mind (as well as one or two others) each possession can easily translate into improved performance. And each improvement holds the potential for victory. So, why not encourage that?

Those who play with a swagger to their game IMO really want to play the game the right way and help their team improve and/or win ball games. Those who play out of desperation tend to make mental mistakes and force things alittle too much at times. And, of course, those who can care less one way or the other are just out there doing their own thing. I think most of our players really want to do better and win games. I think if any player fits the characterization of "I'm here to collect a paycheck and go home" it would be TJ Ford, but even that's not being fair to him.

I think TJ really does want to win, but he has yet to find a way to mesh his style of play with JOB's offensive style. Some guys are alittle reluctant to change even if changing means improvement for the team's sake and not their own. It's probably why TJ has rode the pine these last few games - to give him a chance to see who JOB wants him to play. Granted, there are times when you want you PG to have a scorer's mentality, but I think most coaches want their PG to orchestrate the offense and distribute the ball and to score only when the situation calls for it. Somehow, I don't think that's TJ's mentality. Hopefully w/Watson at the helm and if the team can win more ball games with him, TJ will begin to see their is a better way for him to perform out there. He's not a bad player; just that sometimes what he wants to do isn't what's in the best interest of the team.

Getting back to this Bird should coach issue, no. As PacerGuy points out that would be a wrong move by our GM. Bird needs to light a fire under folks, but he certainly doesn't need to take over on the sidelines. I think JOB got whatever message Bird was trying to send and they did it privately as it should be. I think injuries forced the issue moreso than Bird, however, but either way I hope we continue to see more positive results from the lineup changes and the use of our younger players. Depth remains one of the Pacers' allies. I just hope they don't revert to some of their old ways once Granger and the others return.

Tom White
01-07-2010, 12:29 PM
....(that I challenged him on today's show with)....

I caught the show, and the call that must have been yours. While I was listening I kept thinking "This guy has pulled all of his comments from different threads (by various posters) on PD."

Guess that thought was correct.

Unclebuck
01-07-2010, 12:40 PM
J - ok, I can buy that, the point is a columnist has to cover several teams and several sports, but I think Kravitz is especially ignorant when it comes to the NBA

ChicagoJ
01-07-2010, 01:11 PM
J - ok, I can buy that, the point is a columnist has to cover several teams and several sports, but I think Kravitz is especially ignorant when it comes to the NBA

Why does that matter? We're talking about the article. He already "won."

Unclebuck
01-07-2010, 01:18 PM
Why does that matter? We're talking about the article. He already "won."

I just think if you look at every NBA city and judge whether the columnist is NBA savvy or not, Bob is probably more not than any of them. Of coruse you have certain cities, Portland, SA, Utah where the only game in town is NBA, so the columnist is going to be more up-to-speed. And at the other end of the spectrum in cities like NY, Boston, Philly, LA, Chicago, you have several columnist and probably one in each city covers the NBA quite a bit, so you have more knowledge there. So it really isn't Bob's fault entirely that he's the only columnist in town and the pacers are clearly not the most important game in town

ChicagoJ
01-07-2010, 01:28 PM
You don't have to know anything about sports to write a column about sports. You just have to know how to get people talking. And that's easy.

His audience is not the people that follow *any* team passionately. His audience is the guy (girl) who reads the sports page with his morning coffee to find out what happened last night since he didn't care enough to tune into the game. If the reader flips to the inside page, then he might also see the ads for strip clubs, online poker, car repair places and other businesses that make the sports page a viable part of the newspaper.

Living 225 miles away, though, I think Bob has generally been more tuned in to what is really going on with the team than some of the posters on here want to admit. And he does it with a lot less effort.

Unclebuck
01-07-2010, 01:34 PM
You don't have to know anything about sports to write a column about sports. You just have to know how to get people talking. And that's easy.

His audience is not the people that follow *any* team passionately. His audience is the guy (girl) who reads the sports page with his morning coffee to find out what happened last night since he didn't care enough to tune into the game. If the reader flips to the inside page, then he might also see the ads for strip clubs, online poker, car repair places and other businesses that make the sports page a viable part of the newspaper.

Living 225 miles away, though, I think Bob has generally been more tuned in to what is really going on with the team than some of the posters on here want to admit. And he does it with a lot less effort.

I'll agree with you about "less effort" part.

I don't disagree what his audience is, but that doesn't mean he should be ignorant of the sport he is covering, I guess we disagree.

ChicagoJ
01-07-2010, 02:03 PM
I'm telling you I think he gets it right a lot more often than he's given credit for. I don't see him as being ignorant. He's just stirring the pot or fanning the flames.

speakout4
01-07-2010, 02:10 PM
I'm telling you I think he gets it right a lot more often than he's given credit for. I don't see him as being ignorant. He's just stirring the pot or fanning the flames.
What he gets right derives from tidbit information from blogs, other sports writers, etc. He does not appear to be a student of any game nor does he say anything too incisive. He does seem to have a decent memory recalling prior events. I'm sure he is the guy who is just allowed to say what other sports writers would consider crossing the line of personal opinion and reporting.

MikeDC
01-07-2010, 04:26 PM
I'm telling you I think he gets it right a lot more often than he's given credit for. I don't see him as being ignorant. He's just stirring the pot or fanning the flames.

OK, but there are probably 20 guys on this board (and any other reasonably big message board) that could do exactly the same thing.

Which is a good example of why newspapers are dying. Kravitz actually gets paid good money to do what schmoes like us would willingly do for free.

If I were gonna pay a guy to do it, I'd pay a guy who was exceptionally good at it. Not a guy who could be replaced by giving a sharp, interested fan a press pass.

ChicagoJ
01-07-2010, 05:58 PM
OK, but there are probably 20 guys on this board (and any other reasonably big message board) that could do exactly the same thing.

Which is a good example of why newspapers are dying. Kravitz actually gets paid good money to do what schmoes like us would willingly do for free.

If I were gonna pay a guy to do it, I'd pay a guy who was exceptionally good at it. Not a guy who could be replaced by giving a sharp, interested fan a press pass.

I've got no doubt that he reads this board for ideas. He's trying to get a pulse of the fanbase and perhaps a little inspiration. He had a column about Rick Carlisle where he repeated a number of my comments once.

He's certainly being accused of being lazy. So who here knows him personally?

He was also spot-on with a number of the problems of the 61-win team that were covered up by :bunny: back in the day but everybody around here had their heads buried in the sand and did not want to acknolwdge that he was right.

I don't care who is filling the role of columnist for the Indy Star... they're going to get ripped to shreds around here. And that's probably fine for both them and IndyStar because once again ... the columnist will have people talking and that is the only point that matters.

PS, Back in 1994, I called into the Sports Daily one time when Bill Benner was guest hosting. He'd just said "if the Pacers would have drafted Nick Van Exel instead of Scott Haskin, they would not have needed to make the trade to get Pooh Richardson from the T'Wolves.

Problem was: That trade was during the summer of 1992. Nick (and Haskin as well, obviously) was not drafted until the summer of 1993. Oops.

Nobody here is describing anything new. It doesn't matter.

However, I just made the comment to Tim Bragg during a commercial and dropped off the line. I didn't need or want to be on the air. Bill apologized for his factual mistake and moved on. No harm, no foul.

vnzla81
01-07-2010, 06:28 PM
I agree with you J, I remember the time when Kravitz was calling for the pacers to blow the team up and everybody here was going crazy, now almost five years later we wish that the pacers had pay some attention, I don't always agree to what Kravitz says but I think that he has more idea about the pacers that what many people here think.

duke dynamite
01-07-2010, 06:31 PM
I agree with you J, I remember the time when Kravitz was calling for the pacers to blow the team up and everybody here was going crazy, now almost five years later we wish that the pacers had pay some attention, I don't always agree to what Kravitz says but I think that he has more idea about the pacers that what many people here think.
He said last year we needed to blow up the team, too.

vnzla81
01-07-2010, 06:36 PM
He said last year we needed to blow up the team, too.

and I agree with him on that too, hell they need to do that now, they suck and are not going anywhere.

ChicagoJ
01-07-2010, 06:38 PM
And we need to blow this team up, still.

What's the point?

It's been a 0.500 decade... none of these coaches or players deserve much loyalty to be honest.

At least they have some of the building blocks in place. Some.

duke dynamite
01-07-2010, 06:45 PM
and I agree with him on that too, hell they need to do that now, they suck and are not going anywhere.


And we need to blow this team up, still.

What's the point?

It's been a 0.500 decade... none of these coaches or players deserve much loyalty to be honest.

At least they have some of the building blocks in place. Some.
I didn't say it was a bad idea.

speakout4
01-07-2010, 06:48 PM
He said last year we needed to blow up the team, too.
A poll on PD would have had a 60-40 similar conclusion and PDers don't make a living at this. We have much more in depth analyses regarding this team than kravitz could ever come up with. He just gets paid to print the extreme viewpoints.

Hoop
01-07-2010, 07:13 PM
Should Larry Bird replace JOB as the pacers coach?

I voted no. I want JOB fired and Bryon Scott or a few other possibilities to take over ASAP.

If I HAD to choose between keeping JOB and Bird stepping in, I'd take Bird.

I want JOB gone one way or another. IMO we will not go forward until JOB's gone.

duke dynamite
01-07-2010, 07:15 PM
Should Larry Bird replace JOB as the pacers coach?

I voted no. I want JOB fired and Bryon Scott or a few other possibilities to take over ASAP.

If I HAD to choose between keeping JOB and Bird stepping in, I'd take Bird.

I want JOB gone one way or another. IMO we will not go forward until JOB's gone.
I want to play darts at your house.

Hicks
01-07-2010, 07:42 PM
I want to play darts at your house.

What is that supposed to mean?

d_c
01-07-2010, 07:48 PM
I want JOB gone one way or another. IMO we will not go forward until JOB's gone.

You won't move forward until you get better talent on the roster. For one thing, a better coach isn't stepping into the Pacers' situation until the team upgrades the talent on the roster. Byron Scott wouldn't take the Pacers' job if you fired JOB right now. He'd wait it out for a better situation to open up.

Eddie Jordan was supposedly the problem in Washington. Now with a different coach, it looks like they have the same problems (and this was the case before the Gilbert gun issue).

Kurt Rambis was the longtime assistant of the most successful coach in NBA history. So he brought that knowledge and system to the T-Wolves. Somehow he's not getting the same results as he did during his time with the Lakers. I dunno. Could have something to do with having worse players. Just a guess.

Michael Curry was supposedly the problem last year. Everyone wanted him thrown from a bridge. So the Pistons kicked him to curb and hired the highly regarded assistant coach of a 66 team. Are they winning anymore this year than last? That's not to say Curry did a good job or that Kuester isn't a better coach (because I think he is), but it all starts with the talent.

duke dynamite
01-07-2010, 08:26 PM
What is that supposed to mean?
He's got a picture of JOB stuck on his dart board. Mine has Kravitz's.

Hoop
01-07-2010, 09:13 PM
He's got a picture of JOB stuck on his dart board. Mine has Kravitz's.
Kravitz is a writer, he likes to stir things up, it's his job. He has nothing to do with anything related to the Pacers.

I've been ready for JOB to hit the road since his first season here. He continues to strengthen my position against him.

He will be gone before next season or sooner or what's left of the fan base will be too.

Naptown_Seth
01-07-2010, 10:31 PM
Hemingway is a writer, he likes to stir things up, it's his job.
Fixed. Yep, that's pretty much the definition of "writer". ;)

I mean go no further than the "Granger to Houston" thread. The article that started it is a horribly written piece that doesn't even flow well along the topic. It takes forever to get to the point, a massive no-no in journalistic writing.

But the TOPIC has traction. The writer? You could swap him for a chimp with a Mad-Lib of key hot button words and get the same results.


Sorry Doug, just tired of BK getting this free pass on lazy writing based on stirring the pot as if that's anything close to the same as stimulating thought on a topic with challenging insights.

A good writer can take a boring topic and make it good, he doesn't have to lean on firebomb topics. That's what the interwebs are for.

Naptown_Seth
01-07-2010, 10:33 PM
Bill Benner the guy before Kravitz did the exact same thing. It's called selling newspapers.
Bob Collins didn't do it. Pretty sure they sold more newspapers back then than they are now.

Naptown_Seth
01-08-2010, 12:32 AM
I'm telling you I think he gets it right a lot more often than he's given credit for. I don't see him as being ignorant. He's just stirring the pot or fanning the flames.
He didn't know that Chuck Person won ROY. This part of the debate it over.

You don't realize what it sounds like tuning into his radio show at times when WNDE goes to commercial break. It's brutal.

On top of that, he's not really been sharp with the 500 or Colts either. For years he was trashing out Manning led teams, and I think his extent of 500 coverage is "who are the girls".


I mean the funniest part of all here is the "it sells newspapers". Really? So you're telling me they aren't on the verge of going out of business and that they've got a sound monetized method for presenting information online?

There are a lot of things to blame for the downfall of newspapers, but one of the biggest causes is writing that was unable to differentiate itself or at times even compete with online blogging and forums. I'd say BK is item #1 in proving that point.

Bball
01-08-2010, 12:59 AM
It's going to be tough for anyone to compare them with Bob Collins....

Sollozzo
01-08-2010, 01:10 AM
I agree with Jay, Kravitz is right more often than he gets credit for around here. He sounds pretty intelligent when I listen to Kravitz and Eddie.

Will Galen
01-08-2010, 02:16 AM
I agree with Jay, Kravitz is right more often than he gets credit for around here. He sounds pretty intelligent when I listen to Kravitz and Eddie.

Politicians sound intelligent, but that doesn't mean they know what they are talking about.

Anthem
01-08-2010, 09:32 AM
Politicians sound intelligent
We must be listening to different politicians.

Unclebuck
01-08-2010, 09:35 AM
I agree with Jay, Kravitz is right more often than he gets credit for around here.

Examples?

I don't think he does any reporting on his own, he gets info from Wells, and maybe some other reporter friends he knows around the country. But 90% of the stuff "he may get right" is opinion based. So agreeing with him is not the same as him getting it right.

Hoop
01-08-2010, 05:59 PM
Fixed. Yep, that's pretty much the definition of "writer". ;)


Writer was a poor choice of words on my part, I should have used journalist. Anyway we can label him as ***** stirrer and that will cover it. ;)

speakout4
01-08-2010, 08:00 PM
Bob Collins didn't do it. Pretty sure they sold more newspapers back then than they are now.
Apparently the Collins model has been replaced by the Benner, Miller, Kravitz model.
I'm sure there are at least several more variables with regard to selling newspapers that we haven't touched on.;)