PDA

View Full Version : Bird interviewed by SLAM



Hicks
01-22-2010, 08:01 PM
http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2010/01/q-a-with-larry-bird/

Some snippets:



SLAM: Now if I understand, the three-point shot isnít something you really like, is it?
LB: [Laughs] I like it at certain times. I donít like quick threes off the break, I donít like three-on-twos that end up in a three-point shot. But a lot of coaches think that you play the percentages and if you have shooters you use it to your advantage.



SLAM: I would imagine rookies seek your advice often. When you sign a rookie to the Pacers, is there anything that you make sure to tell each and every rookie that comes to you for advice?
LB: Well, itís funny, you know, all these kids that come in now have all the answers. I can remember when I came in, I went to Dave Cowens, I talked to Dave about different things. I can remember the first time we went on a west coast trip, we were going to be gone for 14 days and I said whatís the difference out here than how it is on the east coast and they said thereís a lot more running and gunning and thereís going to be a lot more opportunities for you to play your total game instead of just scoring and rebounding. The players today, when I talk to them, especially when I sign them, I tell them what we expect of them, and, you know, hard work, show up on time, work on your game in practice, try to improve each year. And some of them take it and some of them down. After I sign them I say, I hope I sign you again to a lot bigger contract. When it comes down to itís not only about displaying your talents on the court, but you have a short time period here to make a living and to make the best of it.



SLAM: I think you would probably agree that when you look at this current Indiana Pacers team, youíre looking at a challenge, and I think youíve been looking at a challenge for the past several years, do you think this is the biggest challenge youíve faced?
LB: Oh yeah, no question about it. We havenít had any money at all. Weíve been up against the cap to go out and get a free agent. When we lose a player when his contract ends for $6 or $7 million, we might have to go out and get three players. We can use the money but to stay under the cap we only have $5 or $6 or $7 million to go out and get three players to try to stay under it. So, you know, thatís just part of the struggle. Obviously losing is very difficult, but when youíre rebuilding you know youíre going through stages, itís going to be tough, but as long as you draft the players and you see a bright future, I think itís going to be lights at the end of the tunnel, itís going to be very good, not only for me, but for the franchise and thatís whatís most important.

SLAM: Absolutely, and I feel like each season this team and this franchise takes a step forward and looks a little better each season. What is it going to take before you, and this franchise, and this team can take that final step and be a powerhouse in the NBA and a threat towards other teams around the League and fight for a title?
LB: Whatís happening is weíre drafting young players, maybe some of them wonít be superstars, but will be great fill-ins, some will be back-up players, some will be starters. And when you get your salaries down, which weíre going to be down to about $28-30 million after next year and thatís the first time, I think, in the history of this franchise weíre going to have an opportunity to go out and look for players and try to fill this roster with the type of players we want here and ones that can win games.

SLAM: What do you like to see in a basketball player? What do you look for when youíre trying to bring guys to Indianapolis?
LB: Well first of all, they give as much off that court as they do on and weíve been very fortunate for that for the last four or five years. Even when we had players here that got themselves into some trouble, they were excellent in our community. They were out there and they were giving, but overall I think if you want to get the type of players in here thatís going to play the game the right way, and not only give it to you in games, but do the right things in practice to prepare themselves.

SLAM: Now, how has the process of scouting changed since 2004? Or has it changed? What are you doing differently now?
LB: Well the kids are so young now. I mean, thereís a lot of kids that come out that have great talent, but theyíre so young you donít know how theyíre going to mature of the years and I think itís really just a guess. You know they have the talent, you know they have the fundamentals, itís just about whether theyíre going to get better and better. Thatís probably been the hardest thing. We like to take guys that have had a lot of college experience and that had good coaching, and been good kids along the way, but you just never know until youíve had then for a couple years because you never know how theyíre going to turn out.

Will Galen
01-23-2010, 02:21 AM
And when you get your salaries down, which weíre going to be down to about $28-30 million after next year and thatís the first time, I think, in the history of this franchise weíre going to have an opportunity to go out and look for players and try to fill this roster with the type of players we want here and ones that can win games.

Everyone expecting a bunch of trades better read the above twice. This is Bird's plan! He wants those expirings to expire so he can get the type player he wants.

Another quote from him I read about a month ago was along the lines of "we won't do anything unless it helps our plan."

So maybe you want to trade Murphy for Z, but for Bird, it will probably take what was rumored. Murphy for Z, a player, and a draft choice.

In other words Bird isn't going to make a major trade unless it's a no brainer.

Hicks
01-23-2010, 02:30 AM
Keep in mind just because we might let the contracts expire doesn't mean we will necessarily get every new guy through free agency. We will be able to make financially lop-sided trades while we are under the cap.

Also, keep in mind that this 3-year plan will probably end with us being back in the thick of the playoff hunt, but not a contender. That will be its own chapter. First things first. I think if things go right, we'll be a 2nd round playoff team (roughly), and then from there you are more likely to see trades to take us further as we go along and/or as needed.

Will Galen
01-23-2010, 02:37 AM
Keep in mind just because we might let the contracts expire doesn't mean we will necessarily get every new guy through free agency. We will be able to make financially lop-sided trades while we are under the cap.

A agree with that. I don't think Bird is interested in overpaying free agents anyway.

Peck
01-23-2010, 03:49 AM
SLAM: Now if I understand, the three-point shot isnít something you really like, is it?
LB: [Laughs] I like it at certain times. I donít like quick threes off the break, I donít like three-on-twos that end up in a three-point shot. But a lot of coaches think that you play the percentages and if you have shooters you use it to your advantage.

Yet he signed him to an extension.:confused:

Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.

Will Galen
01-23-2010, 04:13 AM
Yet he signed him to an extension.:confused:

Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.


Bird doesn't want another coach until the rebuilding is done. Where are we going in the next year and a half anyway? No where. So what difference does it really make? None, except we probably get better draft choices.

CableKC
01-23-2010, 04:47 AM
Everyone expecting a bunch of trades better read the above twice. This is Bird's plan! He wants those expirings to expire so he can get the type player he wants.

Another quote from him I read about a month ago was along the lines of "we won't do anything unless it helps our plan."

So maybe you want to trade Murphy for Z, but for Bird, it will probably take what was rumored. Murphy for Z, a player, and a draft choice.

In other words Bird isn't going to make a major trade unless it's a no brainer.
Why doesn't trading Murphy just for Z+$$$ not fall into the plan? Wouldn't part of the plan also include saving $$$ and waiting it out until the 2011-2012 offseason?

I'm all for getting the most out of our assets....but if I'm Bird....I'm also all for saving my boss some $$$ as well. I'm pretty sure that the Wizards asking price ( at the very least ) is Z+Prospect+Draft choice ( if not more )....if that is the case...why pick a less athletic Big Man that can't post up when the Cavs can get a more versatile player at the same price?

I don't mind asking for the sky then working our way down to a more reasonable price....but I don't also want the Cavs to back away from the negotiating Table with a "Really, you want all that just for Troy Murphy?" response and we are back at "square one".

CableKC
01-23-2010, 04:50 AM
Yet he signed him to an extension.:confused:

Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.
Maybe the Players Bird drafted/signed should help in the short term with JO'B ( as in getting defensive minded Player to improve the defense ) but really fit the style that he wants beyond JO'B and the next season.

Will Galen
01-23-2010, 04:57 AM
Why doesn't trading Murphy just for Z+$$$ not fall into the plan?

Because Bird isn't going to do a trade just to save the owner some money until he has to. We're a full year away from him having to do that.

If you take the money out of it Bird would be giving away an asset for nothing. Just not Bird's style if you ask me.

tadscout
01-23-2010, 05:14 AM
Because Bird isn't going to do a trade just to save the owner some money until he has to. We're a full year away from him having to do that.

If you take the money out of it Bird would be giving away an asset for nothing. Just not Bird's style if you ask me.

Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! I'm tired of hearing over and over lets just get it done for the $$$... When we are the one's with the asset and bargaining postilion... that means we can get more out of a deal...

Multiple teams want Murph therefore we have the upper hand, as well in that we do not have to trade him! BUT if they see him as a key piece for a playoff run, then they'll give more to get him...

I guess all I'm saying is I know we have a history of starting out at a disadvantage in trade talks (Artest, Jackson, Tinsley) but here we are not, so please stop talking as if we are! Only bad trades result that way...

Be patient and let Bird play the negotiation game... and again I say be patient b/c most trades don't happen till very close to the deadline, and that's still weeks away folks....

tadscout
01-23-2010, 05:16 AM
Bird doesn't want another coach until the rebuilding is done. Where are we going in the next year and a half anyway? No where. So what difference does it really make? None, except we probably get better draft choices.

Agreed wholeheartedly.... I also think Herb had a part in that thinking as well...

able
01-23-2010, 11:05 AM
Tad ? Why on earth are you calling Troy Murphy an asset ?

assets are things of value that can be readily converted into cash

Troy is worth very little, in fact an expiring contract is worth more then Murphy
As it is he is a liability, he costs a large fortune in salary ( he is our highest paid player @ 11 million dollars and your income in change)
For that it is statistically proven (or to be proven) that he is making our team play worse, in other words, the results when he plays are inherently worse then when he doesn't.
I state a case for the fact that Murphy falls into these definitions:

"anything that is a hindrance or puts an individual or group at a disadvantage."

"an obligation of an entity arising from past transactions or events"

both are definitions of a "liability"

able
01-23-2010, 11:23 AM
Let's also consider the following, as an afterthought:

The difference between salary cap and luxury tax is something most seem to easily forget.
We want the team to be under the latter, but not the 1st.

cap for 2010-2011 prognoses are between 50 and 53 million
lt for 2010-2011 is related to that between 62 and 65 million

Pacers projected salary for 2010-2011 is 64 million with 12 players on the roster (we will be minus Head, Watson and Diener) (btw 12 million of that is for Murphy)

Pacers projected salary for 2011-2012 is 16 million, but that is with 6 players on the roster.

Now in that situation we would have approx 35 million to play with, but......
- that is for 9 players
- Danny by then costs 12 million a year
- You have one more year left before you have to extend Hibbert and Rush

So if you spend the full 35 (you can not go over the cap on new signings) for 9 players u can buy what ?

You also will be in LT problems the year after when it comes to the above mentioned rookies and one year later Tyler, and AJ.

Now if you trade your contracts for "some" alleviation on salary so to be surely under LT + some prospects or picks, you have some room to move,
Yes a little less to spend but more wiggle room and "cheaper" players.

Getting "under the cap" as he seems to think is a big feat, is very simple, let the contracts run their course and one day they stop, not that hard to figure out, but.....

It is in the "wrong" year, as most "toppers" will be available at the end of THIS season, not next.
Indy is not perse the greatest attraction to those "top players" as it is.


The more I read the more I am convinced that LB is simply not that good a gm.

judicata
01-23-2010, 12:25 PM
Murphy is an asset because other teams want him. Furthermore, he expires after next year, along with all of the other large contracts. It is significant that they expire together, rather than individually, because it provides the Pacers with more flexibility when looking to trade.

Trading him for a contract that expires after this year (Z) and just chilling under the cap does nothing for the playoff prospects of this team. If eating more salary can turn him into a another player that contributes, that is a win.

While this team will need 9 players, hopefully one or two will be draft picks making very little. A couple more will be deep bench players making very little. That leaves a lot of room to play with.

Those big name free agents ain't coming to Indy this year, and shedding Murphy's contract does not make Indy competitive irrespective of the desirability of the team and market. That is why moving his contract for merely cap relief is wasting a resource.

Brad8888
01-23-2010, 12:54 PM
I just read this article, and I had to re-read it to even try to understand what points the author was trying to get across.

I actually feel sorry for people in Bird's position. They have to be nice to people like this who haven't been paying much attention to what has been going on with the franchise, and then speak very carefully to them, weighing every syllable for fear that an interviewer like this will misinterpret them and print what they think was said and intended due to their own assumptions prior to the interview.

For this person to look at this season (and I double checked when it was posted to make sure it was not back in August) and infer that just because changes were made in the off season that the franchise has progressed this year is hard to fathom. Even the most casual of observers who have watched much NBA basketball would understand that this is not the case.

The most telling thing, assuming that Bird was not taken out of context, is that he intends to just let the expirings actually expire unless something virtually risk free that hastens the expirations comes along. If true, Bird is capable of leading this franchise back where it needs to be, IMO. He won't just make popular moves to put people in the seats, and will use his refusal to just get rid of players to do so, with the apparent blessing of Herb Simon, unless there is absolutely no hope to get anything for them any other way as his initial bargaining leverage point. Patience in these circumstances is admirable and very necessary if the Pacers are not to be the Clippers of the East.

His statement about knowing that the players being drafted have the fundamentals is OK on its surface, but it does reveal that the fundamentals of basketball are being assumed here due to the fact that the players are now at the professional level. Larry Brown, Rick Carlisle, Gregg Popovich, and Jerry Sloan would disagree with that. They would counter that there is a certain level of proficiency and awareness of fundamentals that players reach this level with, and then make absolutely sure that those players DO in fact have those skills and then continue to polish and further enhance those skills in actual games. Notice that these are the coaches that are old school and don't push the tempo beyond the physical or mental capacity of their players to do so. At some point I believe Bird will realize that, if he doesn't already, and hopefully there will be a coach that fits this mold available and willing to come in and untrain and then re-train whoever we have after the "Summer of Great Expirations" besides Granger.

docpaul
01-23-2010, 01:42 PM
Yet he signed him to an extension.:confused:

Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.

Eh... I think he sees JOB as the most direct/easy way to get through to the 2011 season. Given that our team will not likely go far between now and then due to cap restrictions, he wants to create as clean of a slate as possible to lure a "real" coach.

Cap flexibility, young players with potential, draft picks, and Granger.

Hicks
01-23-2010, 03:39 PM
Yet he signed him to an extension.:confused:

Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.

I think he hired and keeps Jim around for other reasons. If I had to guess, it would be because:

1) Jim was the best coach willing to take the job in 2007
2) Jim is 100% dedicated to his job (works hard/late, doesn't carry any character/attitude issues that we know about or see) and seems to be a good guy
3) Jim will play uptempo, which, in general at least, Larry seems to want
4) While Jim has proven he can and will be political at times, he's usually a no-nonsense guy who doesn't put up with a lot of BS from players (though again, to a point he can/has), and he's not afraid to tell players how it is.
5) Probably other things I'm forgetting or unaware of

If I had to guess why he's being kept:

1) The reasons he was hired still apply
2) There's nothing significant to be gained in firing him during the year; any coach worth replacing him with would almost certainly rather come on board during the summer.
3) Considering the talent level of our teams, and then on top of that considering health issues, and then players who regressed (TJ, Brandon), there's got to be a lot of slack given if he's interested in being fair to Jim
4) This is a stretch, but maybe another reason is to try to give him a shot at coaching the team as the talent starts to increase (like if we make a trade this summer or next season to begin improving the talent)

Now, with those things said, Jim clearly has issues that we've all seen, discussed, and sure as hell won't ignore. I'm by no means advocating the position that everything's fine. But I think if we can check our frustrations at the door for the moment, take a step back, and consider the bigger picture of these next 18 months, we are probably no worse off by keeping him than doing anything else.

The main thing I would preach is this: Unless he blatantly seems to demote Roy and make Roy regress (not just by a benching, but by playing him less minutes), it's probably for the best to leave things be right now. At least through the end of the season.

From there, Bird will have to decide if he thinks the roster and the coach can handle one another for another season. If he doesn't, then the extension was just a financial "thanks for riding out the ****ty years with us".

tadscout
01-23-2010, 04:30 PM
Tad ? Why on earth are you calling Troy Murphy an asset ?

assets are things of value that can be readily converted into cash

Troy is worth very little, in fact an expiring contract is worth more then Murphy
As it is he is a liability, he costs a large fortune in salary ( he is our highest paid player @ 11 million dollars and your income in change)
For that it is statistically proven (or to be proven) that he is making our team play worse, in other words, the results when he plays are inherently worse then when he doesn't.
I state a case for the fact that Murphy falls into these definitions:

"anything that is a hindrance or puts an individual or group at a disadvantage."

"an obligation of an entity arising from past transactions or events"

both are definitions of a "liability"

BUT! If another team seems to think he'll improve their team and they want him, then yes he is an asset to us!

Gee-wizz it's like we have been stuck in such a down town everybody is stuck in a defeated, negative mindset...

I sure hope Bird and Morey haven't gotten like some of you with their mindsets or theirs no way we are ever turning this back around and becoming winners again.

And able your other post made zero sense to me... sense when was it being a bad GM to get below the Salary Cap :hmm: and gain allot of financial freedom to design the team finally how he wants it... instead of the mess he inherited?

IndyHoosier
01-23-2010, 04:34 PM
What happened to the rumors that Bird is gone after this season? Has this been proven false? I am confused. Is he going to see this thing through or not?

able
01-23-2010, 04:51 PM
BUT! If another team seems to think he'll improve their team and they want him, then yes he is an asset to us!

Gee-wizz it's like we have been stuck in such a down town everybody is stuck in a defeated, negative mindset...

I sure hope Bird and Morey haven't gotten like some of you with their mindsets or theirs no way we are ever turning this back around and becoming winners again.

And able your other post made zero sense to me... sense when was it being a bad GM to get below the Salary Cap :hmm: and gain allot of financial freedom to design the team finally how he wants it... instead of the mess he inherited?

OK so you are describing Murphy as an intangible asset, i can live with that, he has some hidden values though only to others, to us he is simply a liability. (to be an asset he would have to make the team better to the tune of his salary, you tell me if he does)

as for the second part

There is a solid reason why all "better" teams are at least near or over the LT (dont even think about the cap) and that is the fact that you can not run a succesfull basketball team in the NBA below or on the cap.
For that reason GM's are noted for "trading" contracts for players they can use or picks they can use and players they can trade, if we write off 46 million in salary and we can only recoup 35 million, then we have a reduction in "spendingpower "of 11 million dollar, which happens to be Murphy's salary, sooooooo, dumpinng him THIS year or next, is the same but with 2 small differences;

!: JOB can no longer play him at center (we have proven, see record, that we can do without him)
2: there is NO danger of the Pacers being OVER the LT this year (which at this moment in time looks like we WILL be. (this is a financial difference of many millions, how many is depending on how much the added bonus from the NBA is , which depends on how much teams are over in total $)

:)

cheers

Peck
01-24-2010, 05:32 AM
2) There's nothing significant to be gained in firing him during the year;


I'm taking out the rest of your quote in the interest of space and the fact that I don't really have any major disagreements with what you are saying.

However this part here I want to address.

I see this said over and over (not from you btw but in general) and I just disagree with this comment.

I think it totally depends on the reason for the firing and what you plan to do with the rest of the season.

If, as an example, Bird just gets fed up with the style of offense we are running and O'Brien refuses to change styles to match what the team wants done then as long as whoever comes in does nothing but advances the idea of fundamental basketball, good shot selection, individual defensive responsibility, etc. then not only would it not harm the team I can see where this would go a long way in helping the team.

Let's say that the next coach stops the young players from bad habits on offense that they will pick up under O'Brien, can you say that is bad?

If the new coach was told that we really want to focus on defense and not just talk about it and you need to play players who will get the job done and they change the rotation, can you say that is bad?

If nothing else letting the players know that while they are responsible for their actions that management feels they were not given the right tools to work with.

Actually if they do not intend to keep O'Brien for next season I can make an argument that it will do more harm than good to keep him around.

Even his biggest defenders on here will admit that Jim is a system coach and not every coach uses that system. I think they will even admit that the majority of coach's do not use that system. In fact if push comes to shove they would probably even have to concede that very few coach's use that system or even a system close to it.

With that in mind whoever the next long term coach is most likely that person is not going to be one to be free with the offensive shots, so in fact some players are probably developing very bad habits that whoever comes in will have to break. Certainly Danny Granger will not be given the green light to shoot 10+ three pointers every game.

But I can see all of the arguments that you made as well, I just wanted to say that I don't think it is absolutely worthless to consider firing him now.

Will Galen
01-24-2010, 06:23 AM
But I can see all of the arguments that you made as well, I just wanted to say that I don't think it is absolutely worthless to consider firing him now.

Firing JOB now would be a huge mistake.

This coming summer would have been the time to change coaches, before Bird gave JOB an extension. Now they're stuck.

Why? Because the Pacers can't justify paying two coaches while at the same time telling the city of Indianapolis that they can't afford the fieldhouse. You don't negotiate that way.

The city would just say, "You can't afford the fieldhouse because you make dumb decisions, like paying two coaches at the same time." And they would have a point!

CableKC
01-24-2010, 06:28 AM
Because Bird isn't going to do a trade just to save the owner some money until he has to. We're a full year away from him having to do that.

If you take the money out of it Bird would be giving away an asset for nothing. Just not Bird's style if you ask me.


Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! I'm tired of hearing over and over lets just get it done for the $$$... When we are the one's with the asset and bargaining postilion... that means we can get more out of a deal...

Multiple teams want Murph therefore we have the upper hand, as well in that we do not have to trade him! BUT if they see him as a key piece for a playoff run, then they'll give more to get him...

I guess all I'm saying is I know we have a history of starting out at a disadvantage in trade talks (Artest, Jackson, Tinsley) but here we are not, so please stop talking as if we are! Only bad trades result that way...

Be patient and let Bird play the negotiation game... and again I say be patient b/c most trades don't happen till very close to the deadline, and that's still weeks away folks....
The Pacers will likely be $6-7mil over the 2010-2011 LT threshold. If we don't do anything.....what do you think is going to be the cost for the Pacers to trade any of our Big 4 Contracts to a Team under the SalaryCap to shave $6-7 mil off of the 2010-2011 SalaryCap in order to get a Trade Exception?

The answer? The Pacers would have to give up an asset ( prospect, draft choice and $$$ ) that they cannot simply afford.

Ask the Jazz if they'd have preferred to dump Matt Harpring's Expiring 2009-2010 Contract this season as opposed to last season for a Trade Exception so that they can get under the likely 2009-2010 Luxury Tax Threshold. Ask the Nuggets 2 seasons ago if they were happy with being forced to trade Marcus Camby to the Clippers for nothing going into a season where they were already over the LT Threshold. The Jazz had to give up Maynor What do you think the Nuggets could have gotten for Camby if they shopped him the season before? I'm pretty sure that they could have gotten more then a 2nd round pick.

If you still disagree with me.......let me approach this from a different POV.....explain to me how you think the Pacers can realisticall get under the 2010-2011 LT Threshold without paying a heavy price ( as in giving up a prospect, draft pick, $$$ or adding any unwanted Salary for the future....specifically 2011-2012 and beyond ).

Seth and count55 probably can do a much better job of explaining the SalaryCap/Financial side of this....but it is ALWAYS better to go into the season UNDER the LT threshold instead of going into a season OVER the LT threshold. If we don't, unless there is a Team that is absolutely in love with any of the Big 4 Contracts that they'd be willing to ask for very little in return to take them on.....there will likely be a cost that we cannot afford to pay.

Will Galen
01-24-2010, 07:05 AM
If you still disagree with me.......let me approach this from a different POV.....explain to me

I see no reason to go on with this.

The way I see it you just want to get rid of Murphy as quick as possible, and you don't want to wait. Anybody saying anything different you will just disagree with.

Myself, I'm content to let the Pacer's brass handle it.

EDIT; What's new though is we might not be over next year's lux tax when it's computed in July. See> http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=50282

CableKC
01-24-2010, 08:20 PM
I see no reason to go on with this.

The way I see it you just want to get rid of Murphy as quick as possible, and you don't want to wait. Anybody saying anything different you will just disagree with.

Myself, I'm content to let the Pacer's brass handle it.

EDIT; What's new though is we might not be over next year's lux tax when it's computed in July. See> http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=50282
Will, I'm sorry....I'm not trying to be a d*ck here and don't want to come off as a Murphy-Hater and give you a "if you don't disagree with me....then :mad: and :-p"-type response.

My reasoning is based off of the assumption that the LT will be lower and that it is far more important to save the Team/Owners $$$ as opposed to waiting until the next season to see what the best deal we can get. In order to get out from under the LT.....we would need to get a Trade Exception from a Team that is under the Salary Cap ( which would likely cost us a prospect or Draft Pick ) or deal with a Team that is not under the Salary Cap ( and therefore add unwanted Salary to our SalaryCap/Financial situation beyond the 2010-2011 season ).....both options that I do not think is palatable.

That's why I ask those that disagree with me, explain to me how we will get out from under the 2010-2011 Luxury Tax?

Cuz I can't figure out a way to do it without costing us something.

Of course, my above assumptions may change based off of your post from RealGM regarding the impending LT for the 2010-2011 season.

owl
01-24-2010, 08:43 PM
I see no reason to go on with this.

The way I see it you just want to get rid of Murphy as quick as possible, and you don't want to wait. Anybody saying anything different you will just disagree with.

Myself, I'm content to let the Pacer's brass handle it.

EDIT; What's new though is we might not be over next year's lux tax when it's computed in July. See> http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=50282

They not be over and just maybe they are willing to go over the cap this one year with
a much bigger pay-off to come. I agree with you. Only make trades that help the future of the team.

Unclebuck
01-24-2010, 11:20 PM
Yet he signed him to an extension.:confused:

Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.

But Bird knew O'Brien likes the three point shot when he hired him to begin with. So he decided he liked Jim's whole coaching package enough to hire him and then give him an extension - (extension was only done so he wasn't a lameduck)

I don't find anything confusing here.

Hicks answered this much better than I did

Bball
01-25-2010, 02:26 AM
(extension was only done so he wasn't a lameduck)


Things would be worse if he was a lame duck?

Justin Tyme
01-25-2010, 12:07 PM
Things would be worse if he was a lame duck?

I've been saying from day 1 it was a Bird blunder to have given Jimmy an extension. This "lame duck" thinking holds water like a seive. I've said b4 it was a poor decision if ownership has to pay 2 coaches next season when ownership is finanically losing money. How can you justify it to the city of Indianapolis and the fans?

This morning I was looking at the immediate schedule to see what teams the Pacers could possibly defeat. Now, that's truly sad! I have never advocated firing Jimmy, and right now I'd rather not see him fired. :eek: Jimmy O'Stubborn is doing an excellent job all by himself of keeping the Pacers in the hunt for a 5-7 draft pick with his helter skelter run n gun with little "D" system.

Hicks
01-25-2010, 12:20 PM
Lame duck status increases the likelihood of the coach losing the team. That's all there is to it. The extension doesn't promise anything either way, but it can help.

Unclebuck
01-25-2010, 12:36 PM
Things would be worse if he was a lame duck?

Maybe in the players eyes. The botton line is Bird must have thought things could or would be worse if he didn't extend O'Brien

PacerPride33
01-25-2010, 02:08 PM
I can't get over on how important it is for the Pacers to tank this season. Bird needs to make every attempt to trade Troy and even possibly TJ. To be able to get a player like John Wall doesn't come around too often, not to mention Wall plays a spot that is weakest on the team. The worst case scenario that can happen is for the Pacers to win enough games to not make the playoffs and to get another draft pick in the 10-13 range. Tanking this season is the only way to be a team that is better than mediocre.

Bball
01-25-2010, 02:26 PM
Maybe in the players eyes. The botton line is Bird must have thought things could or would be worse if he didn't extend O'Brien

If anything conventional wisdom backfired on this one. I think the players worked their tails off trying to make something out of this losing brand of basketball in hopes that the light at the end of the tunnel was O'Brien's impending departure and instead they got a slap in the face of seeing him extended. That killed their passion for the Indiana Pacers this season... Can't say I blame them.

Talk about mixed messages... You have O'Brien and his mixed messages (and bad basketball)... and then you have Bird sounding like O'Brien should be the last guy coaching the Pacers yet he's extended him and given him a vote of confidence. And the team is a confused mess? No ----!

PaceBalls
01-25-2010, 02:32 PM
I can't get over on how important it is for the Pacers to tank this season. Bird needs to make every attempt to trade Troy and even possibly TJ. To be able to get a player like John Wall doesn't come around too often, not to mention Wall plays a spot that is weakest on the team. The worst case scenario that can happen is for the Pacers to win enough games to not make the playoffs and to get another draft pick in the 10-13 range. Tanking this season is the only way to be a team that is better than mediocre.

I can see John Wall averaging a triple double easy..

a triple double with turnovers :-o :eek:

Naptown_Seth
01-25-2010, 05:06 PM
Everyone expecting a bunch of trades better read the above twice. This is Bird's plan! He wants those expirings to expire so he can get the type player he wants.
Yes, because no one has ever traded to get the type of player they want. No one's ever traded an expiring contract for the type of player they want.

And trading Troy for Big Z's deal actually improves your cap situation sooner, not later. So that's a trade we SHOULD expect, and we should expect that Bird would love to do tons of them right now. If he could trade Dun, TJ, Troy and Jeff all for deals expiring THIS year then he would, specifically for the reason's you cite.


The plan isn't "we just get into FA, sign our goal player, and done". And if it is then he needs to be fired. Free Agency is full of overpriced guys and is not the best way to get the type of player you want.

Let some other sucker dream of FA while you pick off their under appreciated guy for an expiring.


We will be able to make financially lop-sided trades while we are under the cap.
Yep, definitely opens up options there.

Bottom line - he wants those deals (Troy, Dun, TJ primarily) to turn into deals for players he likes a lot more. How or when that happens doesn't matter one bit.

Heck, trade TJ for salary coming back (extending his deal 1 year basically) AND a pick from 6-12, get one of your players there. You didn't even salary dump, you added a year with the vet coming back. BUT you got the guy you wanted.

Naptown_Seth
01-25-2010, 05:30 PM
Bird doesn't want another coach until the rebuilding is done.
Um, JOB is clearly not known as a TEACHING or YOUTH DEVELOPMENT coach, not even close. So you acquire young talent as part of the rebuild and the guy you have running the show feeds on knocking them down, cheap offense, and erratic messages.

And the reason for this is so they can tank to better draft picks?

Congrats, we are the Bulls with Tim Floyd and that means the 3 year plan is in fact a 10 year plan.


How about a coach that might not be a great strategy guy but works very well with younger players and fundamentals. Hey, how about you dump JOB right now and hire Kevin McHale. The rebuild won't be done this April clearly, so you still have at least another full season that a guy who has shown he can work with kids and even win some games and could improve them to go with all these great FAs you are signing.


Able also knocked it out of the park on the whole "who ya gettin" rant regarding the space. MAYBE you get one guy. Maybe. The rest is going to be guys like DJones or JJack. Look at who you get for 4-6m.

Lets do this
35m
15m to strong player
8 players to go, 20m left
8m to a solid starter
7 players to go, 12m left
4m to 3 bench guys around the DJones/Diener level

4 players to go, I'm out of money
Let's say 1m to those 4, so go take 4m out of those other deals. Either you aren't getting the top end guy or you aren't getting a 2nd starter.

What's the roster?
FA
Danny
top 5 pick this year
top 5 pick next year
Roy

This is almost the New Jersey Nets? No, guess again
FA = Harris
Roy = Lopez
top 5 pick this year = best shot at Wall this year
good draft picks = Lee, CDR (played well) TWill, Yi (higher picks)

No Danny I agree, but Lopez has been better than Roy so far so perhaps Alston plus Harris/Lopez matches the FA/Danny/Roy combo in total.

Then you fill out the roster with a bunch of Josh Boones and Bobby Simmons. And $15m, that gets you guys like Peja or Richard Jefferson, not Lebron or Wade (they took less and shorter deals specifically to go FA this year for huge money)



Oh, and since teams are all loading up for this year someone is going to lose out. Let's say the Clips and Nets come up big for James, Bosh and Wade. The means the Cavs are now in the water for a big FA, and with them gone then they might have to wait till the following season and compete directly with the Pacers.

If the Cavs lose Lebron their salary drops to $33m.


And if the Cavs keep him (ditto Miami/Wade) then it means the NJ, Clips and Knicks of the world are still on the hunt. Is Indy really going to match what LA or NY City can offer if the price is identical otherwise?

Knicks have D'Antoni even. NJ has the Jay-Z connection. And it's hard not to think that Dunleavy will be gone in LA and right as Griffin returns to join Gordon.

90'sNBARocked
01-25-2010, 05:50 PM
Even when we had players here that got themselves into some trouble, they were excellent in our community. They were out there and they were giving, but overall I think if you want to get the type of players in here thatís going to play the game the right way, and not only give it to you in games, but do the right things in practice to prepare themselves

Something to remember when were quick to rip apart a former Pacer

90'sNBARocked
01-25-2010, 05:57 PM
The more I read the more I am convinced that LB is simply not that good a gm.

The truth is he is not.

If we were discussing the GM of the Pacers but his name was Bob Smith, not Larry "the legend" Bird, he would be ripped to shreads.

The guy contridicts himself constantly and since he took over the PAcers have gone downward

Just the facts

BlueNGold
01-25-2010, 07:38 PM
Something to remember when were quick to rip apart a former Pacer

Excellent in the community by using firearms on our streets?...or racing down our streets at 3AM in the morning being chased (for doing nothing I'm sure) by thugs.

From what I've heard, the only time they were in the community was between 11pm and 5am in the morning. Like my dad always said, nothing good ever happens after midnight...;)

......OK, I got it! You are talking about the annual Tinsley coat drive that I'm sure he founded...

NBA cares alright. They care about PR...to ensure they make more $.

90'sNBARocked
01-26-2010, 03:25 PM
Excellent in the community by using firearms on our streets?...or racing down our streets at 3AM in the morning being chased (for doing nothing I'm sure) by thugs.

From what I've heard, the only time they were in the community was between 11pm and 5am in the morning. Like my dad always said, nothing good ever happens after midnight...;)

......OK, I got it! You are talking about the annual Tinsley coat drive that I'm sure he founded...

NBA cares alright. They care about PR...to ensure they make more $.


I dont want to single you out but I think its weak to use the word "thug" which I absolutely HATE! Second and I would pose this same question in my head "What have you done for your community? I know I havent myself voluntered in about 5 years

Say what you want but Jackson volunteer both his time and money.

I think a whole lot of us (myself included) need a long look in the mirror

Judge not least you be judged

ok my rants over