PDA

View Full Version : Kravitz end of the season sit down with Bird..



Peck
04-28-2011, 03:12 AM
I love how Larry is pretty blunt, in particular about Lance.

While I appreciate the job he has done & would be more than willing to welcome him back. I think he owes it to Herb Simon and the franchise to not drag this out. In fact by now my thought is if he doesn't know what he wants to do then I'm not sure he should be leading this going forward. I want 100% committment all the way around from everyone.

Either way, another positive Pacer piece by Bob.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20110428/SPORTS15/104280388/1062/SPORTS04/Improvement-there-s-still-long-way-go

For the first time in years, the Indiana Pacers can say "wait till next year" and not have it sound like a threat. A 20-18 regular-season finish and a competitive five-game playoff series loss to the No. 1 seed Chicago Bulls has Indiana fans finally coming out of self-imposed exile.

There is, however, a long way to go for this franchise.

A really long way to go, with a lot of changes still to come before the Pacers become any kind of challenger in the Eastern Conference.

"Anybody who watches us play a little bit and has any basketball IQ knows what we need," team president Larry Bird said Tuesday. "It's no secret. Everybody around the league knows what we're looking for in the draft and free agency."

No. 1: A long, athletic power forward who can score and defend at the basket.

No. 2: Another perimeter scorer (O.J. Mayo?) who can take some of the load off Danny Granger.

So where do you find these guys?

Free agency is always a roll of the dice, especially for a small-market team that isn't a hot spot for young, single athletes. That's particularly true this year with an uninspiring free-agent class. So for the most part, it will have to come through trades, much like the one last year that landed Darren Collison.

"Teams are going to be shedding payroll," Bird said. "With the money we're going to have, we'll be able to do some things this summer. And whatever we can't do, the next summer we'll have another $10 million coming off the (salary) cap."

The greatest improvement has to come from within the roster. Bird gave capsule summaries of several players as they head into an important summer:

Roy Hibbert has to continue getting stronger. "It's always going to be about his strength," Bird said. "But he'll be fine. The biggest problem is he gets down on himself."

Regarding Collison, ditto on strength. Once he was deprogrammed after months under fired coach Jim O'Brien, he flourished. Next year, he needs to attack more.

Tyler Hansbrough has to develop more ways to score, including developing a left hand and some subtle moves around the hoop. On a 50-plus-win team, he's probably a 25 minutes per game rotation player.

"With him now, it's in-game adjustments," Bird said. "When they switch the way they're playing him, he has a hard time picking it up and adjusting, and he's getting frustrated. But that takes time."

Paul George has to learn how to put the ball on the floor and create more scoring opportunities inside the 3-point arc. That said, Bird loves his work ethic, calling him "one of the five best young guys I've been around in all my years in the game."

Granger had a good playoff series, but Bird felt he took some small steps backward this year and wants to see him step up his game.

"He's a top-30 player," Bird said. "I've always thought he could be an All-Star and he's close, but he's not there yet. I didn't think he was as committed consistently as he's been in the past. It would be really nice if he could be our second scorer.''

Brandon Rush? Somebody has to explain why they picked up his option. My sense is he'll be dealt this summer.

"He's so inconsistent," Bird said. "I hate to see him turn into a role player. All the skills he's got, but he's not consistent."

Lance Stephenson has to have some kind of personal revelation this summer, or he's going to waste a precious gift.

"When he's playing, he's fine and has as much talent as anybody on this team," Bird said. "He's a long shot, but he's my ace in the hole. If we can get him to grow up, he knows how to play . . .

"I know he's a pain in the *** and the guys in the locker room get frustrated with him, but I'm not giving up on him. Unless he does something crazy."

Before anything happens, though, the first domino has to fall, and that involves Bird.

Does he stay or does he go? We spoke for 40 minutes before Tuesday's game; one second, he sounded like he was staying, the next, like he was leaving.

His tenure has been a mixed bag, some hits and some misses, but he has done the big-picture things the Pacers needed, establishing a young nucleus while getting the team out of salary-cap purgatory. He has earned the right to call his own shot here.

Whatever he does, he must do it quickly. Bird would like to remain and do the draft, but it's only fair for a new team president to come in and begin building the team the way he sees fit. And Bird is fine with that.

Once the Bird question is settled, then interim coach Frank Vogel's future can be addressed. By any measure, he has done an amazing job, and I'd like to see him be rewarded.

That said, I've been struck by how nobody on this team, on or off the record, has said, "Absolutely, positively, Frank should get the job." The furthest anybody will go is, "Yes, he's done a very good job."

It's going to be an intriguing summer, one the Pacers have been pointing toward for years.

Bob Kravitz is a columnist for The Indianapolis Star

HOOPFANATIC
04-28-2011, 03:20 AM
I knew it!! The players want a real coach.

Constellations
04-28-2011, 03:22 AM
Good read.

But I'm telling you, give Frank the keys and let him have a summer camp and he'll turn this into a 45-50 win team.

IndyProdigy
04-28-2011, 03:29 AM
Paul George has to learn how to put the ball on the floor and create more scoring opportunities inside the 3-point arc. That said, Bird loves his work ethic, calling him "one of the five best young guys I've been around in all my years in the game."

WOW thats high praise. not surprising though after seeing his tweet at 5am after a playoff loss that he was just coming out of the gym.

Jared Sullinger
04-28-2011, 03:41 AM
So if Bird wants Granger to be our second scorer, who does he want to be our primary scorer?

spazzxb
04-28-2011, 03:51 AM
"He's so inconsistent," Bird said. "I hate to see him turn into a role player. All the skills he's got, but he's not consistent."

Anyone else remember a big aurgument about the word inconsistent earlier this season.

ilive4sports
04-28-2011, 04:13 AM
"He's so inconsistent," Bird said. "I hate to see him turn into a role player. All the skills he's got, but he's not consistent."

Anyone else remember a big aurgument about the word inconsistent earlier this season.

You really want to bring that up again? The things that Brandon is inconsistent with isn't his three point shooting, its everything else...

Reading what he said about Paul George, wow. One of the 5 best young guys he's ever been around? That is some high praise coming from Larry Bird. Another reason I think this kid will be special for us.

mattie
04-28-2011, 04:26 AM
OH wow I pray and hope Bird stays. We're obviously on the same page. I mean he nailed it, he was painfully obvious about the glaring weaknesses on this team and what they need. I hope and pray he stays with us. Because I don't want someone else to walk in here clueless about what this team needs.

mattie
04-28-2011, 04:27 AM
Reading Bird's thoughts were almost identical to my entire feelings about this team. We need Bird to come back... He knows what we need.

rexnom
04-28-2011, 04:37 AM
I like the Bird/Morway/Vogel trio moving forward.

Will Galen
04-28-2011, 05:04 AM
Bob Kravitz with three straight good columns! I'll be darn!

wintermute
04-28-2011, 05:47 AM
Bird doesn't pull any punches, does he. For what's it worth, I think his evaluations are dead on. Guess he's not trying to talk up any of our players for trade purposes :laugh:

Regarding Lance's problems, on the plus side Bird seems to be on the ball. On the other hand, is his talent really that good to be worth the aggravation? Guess Larry has earned the benefit of the doubt.

AesopRockOn
04-28-2011, 05:55 AM
No mention of the impending lockout. Hopefully he'll relay his thoughts on that in the next few days.

Also he sounds like he's in deep with Lance. He has to know that he should be able to drop the kid from the team the moment he ****s up (again).

BringJackBack
04-28-2011, 06:19 AM
"I know he's a pain in the *** and the guys in the locker room get frustrated with him, but I'm not giving up on him. Unless he does something crazy."

Damn...if you're a player and you're known as "A pain in the ***," I don't know why he's being kept around. Especially the 12-15th man.

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 08:29 AM
IOnce the Bird question is settled, then interim coach Frank Vogel's future can be addressed. By any measure, he has done an amazing job, and I'd like to see him be rewarded.

That said, I've been struck by how nobody on this team, on or off the record, has said, "Absolutely, positively, Frank should get the job." The furthest anybody will go is, "Yes, he's done a very good job."



This deserves some discussion.

Why haven't the players said they want Frank as their coach. Are they just covering themselves? No one wants to go out on a limb?

I think what Kravitz is saying here, that no player on or even off the record (you know Wells will back this up) is saying that Frank should get the job is extremely revealing and to me that is a huge red flag.

Makes me wonder. Do the players think yeah Frank was great as the anti-Job, but as the full time coach for the next 3 seasons they aren't sure. Do the players think Frank is too soft on the players, is he too positive - that can get old pretty quick.

This makes me completely re-think whether Vogel should be the coach going forward.

Some of you will think I am over-reacting, but what the players think is vital

One thing I will say and I do not know if this applies to Vogel or not. But a coach does need to be really strong with X's and O's, because late in a close game when the players go into the huddle with their coach, they have to believe what the coach is saying, the play he is calling the set he is drawing up. A coach can be a great motivator, a breath of fresh air after the previous coach, but there has to be some real substance in reserve

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 08:30 AM
No mention of the impending lockout. Hopefully he'll relay his thoughts on that in the next few days.

Also he sounds like he's in deep with Lance. He has to know that he should be able to drop the kid from the team the moment he ****s up (again).


I don't think management can comment. I mean he can say things are business as usual for now, hoefully things get worked out, we are proceeding ahead as if there won't
be a lockout.

PR07
04-28-2011, 08:36 AM
I'm a little surprised Bird was so blunt and straight-forward with his answers. However, as a fan, it's great because you get a feel for what he thinks of a lot of the players. His opinion isn't different from what a lot of us have already figured out, but it's nice to see he's on the same level of thinking.

mildlysane
04-28-2011, 08:51 AM
This deserves some discussion.

Why haven't the players said they want Frank as their coach. Are they just covering themselves? No one wants to go out on a limb?

I think what Kravitz is saying here, that no player on or even off the record (you know Wells will back this up) is saying that Frank should get the job is extremely revealing and to me that is a huge red flag.

Makes me wonder. Do the players think yeah Frank was great as the anti-Job, but as the full time coach for the next 3 seasons they aren't sure. Do the players think Frank is too soft on the players, is he too positive - that can get old pretty quick.

This makes me completely re-think whether Vogel should be the coach going forward.

Some of you will think I am over-reacting, but what the players think is vital

One thing I will say and I do not know if this applies to Vogel or not. But a coach does need to be really strong with X's and O's, because late in a close game when the players go into the huddle with their coach, they have to believe what the coach is saying, the play he is calling the set he is drawing up. A coach can be a great motivator, a breath of fresh air after the previous coach, but there has to be some real substance in reserve
I think I agree. Don't get me wrong, I loved the job Vogel did this year. Loved it. But, in the final minutes of each game of the playoffs, he showed his lack of experience and actual coaching abilities. Perhaps a more experienced coach or one with better X and O's could have staved off the furious comebacks that the Bulls had. Maybe I am wrong, but that stood out to me.

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 08:55 AM
I think I agree. Don't get me wrong, I loved the job Vogel did this year. Loved it. But, in the final minutes of each game of the playoffs, he showed his lack of experience and actual coaching abilities. Perhaps a more experienced coach or one with better X and O's could have staved off the furious comebacks that the Bulls had. Maybe I am wrong, but that stood out to me.


Not to get off on this tangent (as I would want to go back and re-watch the late game situations because just because they didn't score doesn't mean the coach didn't call a great play) but in general I think the bigger problem is the Pacers lack of go-to-scorer, not the plays that are being called

luis3ep
04-28-2011, 08:59 AM
I could have sworn that Granger and McRoberts were on record that they wanted Vogel back as coach? McRoberts even went as far as to say that he'd run through a wall for Vogel.

RWB
04-28-2011, 09:16 AM
So if Bird wants Granger to be our second scorer, who does he want to be our primary scorer?

I think he's banking on Stephenson. I can't say which coach but I was told off the record last summer they were worried about his head/maturity, but he had the talent to be more than an allstar. We're talking Deron Williams, Carmello Anthony skills.

Sparhawk
04-28-2011, 09:20 AM
Not to get off on this tangent (as I would want to go back and re-watch the late game situations because just because they didn't score doesn't mean the coach didn't call a great play) but in general I think the bigger problem is the Pacers lack of go-to-scorer, not the plays that are being called

I think part of the problem was the plays being drawn up. Not just the end of 4th quarter, but at the end of every quarter seemed to be an ISO for the point or Granger and they all failed miserably. I didn't see one ISO executed very well. Part of it is also execution too.

The coach should not have drawn up so many ISO. No one can create their own shot, so the logical thing would be some kind of ball movement, whether a screen or pick and roll.

Heisenberg
04-28-2011, 09:29 AM
Can you imagine having to sit down and talk to Kravitz for 40 minutes about how you perform your job?

Anyway, far as no players coming out with a strong "Keep Coach Frank," I don't make much of it. I'm sure they'll be consulted by the people that actually make the call when the time comes. Them not saying it to the media just tells me they're a pretty young bunch and none of them feel like they have the type of pull to say something like that.

Glad to see Larry holding Danny accountable for some of the regressions he made pre-playoffs.

Do think it's time for all of us to face reality with Rush. Yep, has the tools, been plenty long enough to realize he'll never put them to full use. It's not him becoming a role player, he already is. Sure he'll continue to tease us every so often, but he is what he is. Use him in situations like Vogel did at times on Korver, lock and trail type defender, he shines there. Offensive floor spacing to keep a defense honest. If the shot's off or the opponent doesn't have a guy they run through a billion offball screens, let him sit. There've been bigger mistakes than Brandon Rush in NBA history, hell in Rush family history.

owl
04-28-2011, 09:42 AM
I think the proper way to proceed is to let the process work its way out with interviews for the job. Priority number one is what is Bird going to do. I am concerned about the wishy-washy way he is about the subject. That makes me think he is really split about it. With that kind of conflict maybe someone else should take over who is fully commited. I hope a fully engaged Bird comes back.

15th parallel
04-28-2011, 09:50 AM
Not to get off on this tangent (as I would want to go back and re-watch the late game situations because just because they didn't score doesn't mean the coach didn't call a great play) but in general I think the bigger problem is the Pacers lack of go-to-scorer, not the plays that are being called

I think the term go-to-scorer is very broad in meaning. I mean everybody on that team can be a go-to-scorer, but they just to assign one player on that. The only skills that a go-to-scorer need is to be able to shoot the ball in crunch time, whether it's a jumper, a dribble drive or an alley-oop. The critical part is what is the most suitable play for your go-to-scorer. Reggie is the go-to-guy for points. Does he have crazy dribbling skills? No. Does he have great athleticism? No. Can he create his own shot ala Jordan or Kobe? No. But how is he successful as a go-to-guy for points? They have great set plays for him, like screens and picks and specific player movement for him to get open jumpers. That's just it. The key is on the set plays for your chosen go-to-guy.

Kuq_e_Zi91
04-28-2011, 09:55 AM
This deserves some discussion.

Why haven't the players said they want Frank as their coach. Are they just covering themselves? No one wants to go out on a limb?

I think what Kravitz is saying here, that no player on or even off the record (you know Wells will back this up) is saying that Frank should get the job is extremely revealing and to me that is a huge red flag.

Makes me wonder. Do the players think yeah Frank was great as the anti-Job, but as the full time coach for the next 3 seasons they aren't sure. Do the players think Frank is too soft on the players, is he too positive - that can get old pretty quick.

This makes me completely re-think whether Vogel should be the coach going forward.

Some of you will think I am over-reacting, but what the players think is vital

One thing I will say and I do not know if this applies to Vogel or not. But a coach does need to be really strong with X's and O's, because late in a close game when the players go into the huddle with their coach, they have to believe what the coach is saying, the play he is calling the set he is drawing up. A coach can be a great motivator, a breath of fresh air after the previous coach, but there has to be some real substance in reserve

Are we forgetting Tyler's post game press conference following Game 5?

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/playoffs/2011/04/26/0041000105_ind_chi_postgame5.nba

Trader Joe
04-28-2011, 10:03 AM
"Unless he does something crazy..."

Those words will haunt us one of these days folks...haunt us.

Justin Tyme
04-28-2011, 10:06 AM
Glad to see Larry holding Danny accountable for some of the regressions he made pre-playoffs.


It's nice to hear Bird say what many have been saying ALL year long!

PR07
04-28-2011, 10:06 AM
I think the term go-to-scorer is very broad in meaning. I mean everybody on that team can be a go-to-scorer, but they just to assign one player on that. The only skills that a go-to-scorer need is to be able to shoot the ball in crunch time, whether it's a jumper, a dribble drive or an alley-oop. The critical part is what is the most suitable play for your go-to-scorer. Reggie is the go-to-guy for points. Does he have crazy dribbling skills? No. Does he have great athleticism? No. Can he create his own shot ala Jordan or Kobe? No. But how is he successful as a go-to-guy for points? They have great set plays for him, like screens and picks and specific player movement for him to get open jumpers. That's just it. The key is on the set plays for your chosen go-to-guy.

I don't necessarily agree with this. Reggie was unique because he was one of the best, if not thee best player in recent NBA history, in coming off screens and shooting curl jumpers. You simply couldn't defend it without giving him enough time to get a good look off. Even if we set screens for Danny like this, he wouldn't be nearly as effective because that's not his skill-set. So what does that leave us in terms of plays for Danny?

The problem with Danny is that his skill-set is between a good shooter and a good one on one player (but he's not great at either). He's not Ray Allen, but he's not Kobe one one one either (very few are). That's why I think its hard to make him the go-to guy. I don't think he's a guy you set "Reggie screens" for, and he's not a guy you can just give the ball, iso, a al Derrick Rose, and simply say "take them".

Justin Tyme
04-28-2011, 10:23 AM
"Unless he does something crazy..."

Those words will haunt us one of these days folks...haunt us.


Absolutely! Stephenson cares the feces out of me! His propensity for doing harm to the franchise isn't worth it. Bird knows it too, but hopes Stephenson "will get it in the very near future." He admits he causes problems, and yet sticks his head in the sand. Love of talent can only go so far when it's the franchise future at stake. It's like with Artest. It wasn't if he'd cause another problem but when.

SMosley21
04-28-2011, 10:25 AM
Damn...if you're a player and you're known as "A pain in the ***," I don't know why he's being kept around. Especially the 12-15th man.

Because as the 12-15th man he's really not going to ruin the team, and if he does get his head on straight he automatically becomes a rotation player that can give other teams fits instead of us.

I DO think that he needs to be gone if he screws up majorly again.

brichard
04-28-2011, 10:40 AM
On my Facebook poll, 3 vote for Vogel to get the job, and one person dissents. You know who he keeps reminding me of? Lawrence Frank. I know that may not be a valid comparison, but Frank was a young guy when he went to coach the nets. He actually had a decent run for a few years before they just became terrible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Frank

I think the challenge with coaches, is that at least with Vogel we have a known. There are very few coaches that are awesome wherever you go. I mean after Riley, Jackson, and Larry Brown... who else is there?

Justin Tyme
04-28-2011, 10:48 AM
I never realized how much Bird and my thinking were alike on what this team needs and how to get it.

"Anyone who watches us play a little bit and has any BB IQ knows what we need." It's no secret. Everyone around the league knows what we are looking for in the draft and FA." "So for the most part it will have to come through trades, much like the one last year that landed DC."

#1 a PF.

It's pretty obvious he doesn't see Hans as the starting PF of the future as many feel Hans is.

#2 Perimeter scorer. Thus the failed trade to get Mayo, b/c Mr. Inconsistant is too inconsistant. Rush has just become another Rush.

I'm not sure Shade won't be proven right about Bayless not being the player that shouldn't have been traded. Especially, if he continues to play like he did in those 8 games in April next year. OH btw, he was playing PG position and averaging 22 PPG.

Hicks
04-28-2011, 11:00 AM
I think he's banking on Stephenson. I can't say which coach but I was told off the record last summer they were worried about his head/maturity, but he had the talent to be more than an allstar. We're talking Deron Williams, Carmello Anthony skills.

I hope to hell he's not banking on Stephenson for anything. Especially to be our leading scorer.

And I'm someone who sees the talent.

Trader Joe
04-28-2011, 11:11 AM
I'm sorry count me as someone who doesn't see the talent either.

Was ok at Cincinatti (the fact he even had to go there should tell us something) and didn't see anything this year.

Let's assume for a second that he is as talented as some make him out to be, then how big of a head case does that make him that they STILL wouldn't play him? I mean we aren't exactly the Los Angeles Lakers or the Boston Celtics when it comes to depth. We could use the horses.

So our choices are either

1.) Incredibly talent, but so bat**** crazy he can't even get off the bench on a team that was 37-45.

or

2.) Not that good, and still pretty crazy.

Those are the 2 options.

joeyd
04-28-2011, 11:53 AM
"Unless he does something crazy..."

Those words will haunt us one of these days folks...haunt us.

I agree. I think Bird has given Lance too long of a leash here that he could eventually hang himself with. The message to me is that "hey, we will keep putting up with your crap and indiscretions, as long as you don't get arrested." Hello Tinsley Part II.

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 11:58 AM
I see Lance's considerably talent. he's got a great NBA body and true point guard skills that put Collison and Price to shame

RWB
04-28-2011, 11:59 AM
It doesn't appear Bird is ready to cut Stephenson loose so should Bird be cut loose for bad judgment?

PaceBalls
04-28-2011, 12:00 PM
Absolutely! Stephenson cares the feces out of me! His propensity for doing harm to the franchise isn't worth it. Bird knows it too, but hopes Stephenson "will get it in the very near future." He admits he causes problems, and yet sticks his head in the sand. Love of talent can only go so far when it's the franchise future at stake. It's like with Artest. It wasn't if he'd cause another problem but when.


I know Lance loves to stir up the ****, but personally, I don't give a crap :p

Seriously though... There is a huge difference between Lance and Artest. The main one being that Lance isn't our most important player. If Lance does something stupid... big deal. We move on and slightly ponder what could have been after DC dribbles the ball off his foot for the 3rd time in a game.

The Sleeze
04-28-2011, 12:12 PM
......1.) Incredibly talented, but so bat**** crazy he can't even get off the bench on a team that was 37-45.....

:laugh: I just keeping seeing Lance looking like Joe Dirt when he is in the fumigation tent.

Lou Bega
04-28-2011, 12:24 PM
Rush's contract was worth renewing. I never expected him to be an allstar. He is a decent rotation player. Capable of guarding several top tier NBA players in spots.

Liked what I read about PG. If DC gets too much bulk does his already inconsistent jump shot regress?

I think we can find the long 4 maybe in the draft but the rookie to be will not have a huge impact this next season. Do the Pacers resign Mc Roberts?

graphic-er
04-28-2011, 12:26 PM
I see Lance's considerably talent. he's got a great NBA body and true point guard skills that put Collison and Price to shame

I agree, its shame we did not get to see him that much this year. I remember seeing him make amazing heads up passes to get guys easy buckets during the 6 gamer losing streak. I thought that when we first drafted him that he was going to be a tunnel vision chucker who can get to the hoop.

naptownmenace
04-28-2011, 12:33 PM
I see Lance's considerably talent. he's got a great NBA body and true point guard skills that put Collison and Price to shame

Lance won't ever play to his abilities unless he can play at his true position of SG. He has the talent and ability to get his own shot and instead of setting others up, he should be used as the designated ISO player - or not at all.

I still think there are better options out there but I guess we'll just have to stick with Lance for at least another season.

Hicks
04-28-2011, 12:43 PM
It doesn't appear Bird is ready to cut Stephenson loose so should Bird be cut loose for bad judgment?

Possibly.

Hicks
04-28-2011, 12:44 PM
The 'so what if he blows up' argument doesn't work IMO. You have to remember the only reason they would put up with him is because they believe he's talented enough to become an important member of this team. He won't stay the 12th man forever.

RWB
04-28-2011, 12:49 PM
The 'so what if he blows up' argument doesn't work IMO. You have to remember the only reason they would put up with him is because they believe he's talented enough to become an important member of this team. He won't stay the 12th man forever.

Absolutely agree. What's in play is Walsh always wanted to be competitive while Bird isn't satisfied unless you're playing for a championship. Obviously he feels there are very few current Pacers that can attain that goal. He put's Stephenson and George in the can talent range.

wintermute
04-28-2011, 01:02 PM
I see Lance's considerably talent. he's got a great NBA body and true point guard skills that put Collison and Price to shame

Let's say Lance gets past his off-court issues and truly does pan out. Who would you compare his game to? I'm having trouble coming up with a decent comparison.

Lance may have an NBA body, but that sort of strong, thick frame is usually not associated with NBA guards.

Sookie
04-28-2011, 01:03 PM
The fact that I want Frank Vogel back, makes me want Bird back too.

The fact that Bird is this much in love with Lance, that he ignores the fact that his teammates can't stand him, he's screwed up 4 times already..shows a side of Bird that the Jim O'brien thing showed. He's stubborn. Possibly too stubborn for the team's good.

vnzla81
04-28-2011, 01:04 PM
Absolutely agree. What's in play is Walsh always wanted to be competitive while Bird isn't satisfied unless you're playing for a championship. Obviously he feels there are very few current Pacers that can attain that goal. He put's Stephenson and George in the can talent range.

Tyreke Evans.

MyFavMartin
04-28-2011, 01:19 PM
I don't necessarily agree with this. Reggie was unique because he was one of the best, if not thee best player in recent NBA history, in coming off screens and shooting curl jumpers. You simply couldn't defend it without giving him enough time to get a good look off. Even if we set screens for Danny like this, he wouldn't be nearly as effective because that's not his skill-set. So what does that leave us in terms of plays for Danny?

The problem with Danny is that his skill-set is between a good shooter and a good one on one player (but he's not great at either). He's not Ray Allen, but he's not Kobe one one one either (very few are). That's why I think its hard to make him the go-to guy. I don't think he's a guy you set "Reggie screens" for, and he's not a guy you can just give the ball, iso, a al Derrick Rose, and simply say "take them".


That handoff DC gave to and led to a 3 late in the last game by DG was pretty sweet. Danny's a pretty darn good shooter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVVWzM8hV0I

Justin Tyme
04-28-2011, 01:30 PM
true point guard skills that put Collison and Price to shame


Wow, you could see that in the few games Stephenson played! You NEVER once made any type of statement like this during the season in any threads or debates about Stephenson. Why the revelation of your feelings now??

Justin Tyme
04-28-2011, 02:06 PM
[QUOTE=Thingfish;1226949]

The main one being that Lance isn't our most important player. /QUOTE]


Neither was Shawne Williams. He still hurt the Pacers with his bad PR.

What some don't seem to get is that the average Indiana citizen who isn't a diehard fan still associates the Pacers as thugs. They don't understand those players are gone now, so if Stephenson creates a PR nightmare those citizens see the SOS with the Pacers. How many times have I been told by people that they haven't followed the Pacers since the fight in Detroit,
and all the player off the court problems. They got fed up with "THOSE" Pacers, and aren't interested in the team anymore. Nothing proves this out more than the loss in attendance.

It irrates the stuffings out of me to read posters say I don't care about the player causing problems as long as we win. That attitude is nothing more than selfishness to get an end result with disregard to the potential harm to your so called beloved Pacers. It's hard to overcome a bad reputation once you have one. It takes time with NO MORE PR PROBLEMS. That's right NO MORE PR PROBLEMS.

RWB
04-28-2011, 02:12 PM
What some don't seem to get is that the average Indiana citizen who isn't a diehard fan still associates the Pacers as thugs. They don't understand those players are gone now, so if Stephenson creates a PR nightmare those citizens see the SOS with the Pacers.
.

Sounds like someone who has no interest in the Pacers one way or another and probably has not purchased a ticket since Reggie retired.

bellisimo
04-28-2011, 02:21 PM
a lot of people are asking if Lance is so good how come he can't even get off the bench?

I honestly think that Bird and co are trying their best to hold a tight leash with him and sending him a message that he will never sniff the NBA court if he doesn't get his head in the right place. And I agree with that.

If you want him to learn to grow up, you can't reward him with playing time right now. Specially when he is only 19 years old. Yes the dude can be a game changer due to his "talent" but until we manage to get his mind out of the gutter, I don't mind him being the 12th man.

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 02:27 PM
Wow, you could see that in the few games Stephenson played! You NEVER once made any type of statement like this during the season in any threads or debates about Stephenson. Why the revelation of your feelings now??


Yes, I did, after the game at Dallas.

I typically don't hold back my thoughts.

Reginald
04-28-2011, 02:30 PM
I see Lance's considerably talent. he's got a great NBA body and true point guard skills that put Collison and Price to shame

Huh? The kid is a selfish scorer with poor fundamentals, poor shot selection, and a body and skillset somewhere between a SG and SF. The day Stephenson has an assist-to-turnover ratio north of +3 or makes more than 40% of his shots is the day the Pacers draw a charge at the United Center on Derrick Rose.

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 03:06 PM
Huh? The kid is a selfish scorer with poor fundamentals, poor shot selection, and a body and skillset somewhere between a SG and SF. The day Stephenson has an assist-to-turnover ratio north of +3 or makes more than 40% of his shots is the day the Pacers draw a charge at the United Center on Derrick Rose.


OK, I grant you all that I suppose, but he still has real point guard innate skills that cannot be taught and that are almost impossible to find in players today. He sees the court, he sees the play before it developes, he has an innate ability to pass the ball. That is what I mean when I say "point guard skills" shooting, assist to turnover ratio, poor selection.....is not what I'm talking about

I think you and I are discussing different aspects to his game.

I was one who either did care or had no knowledge about his game until I saw him play in March, I was expecting to not be impressed, but I was

BillS
04-28-2011, 03:07 PM
Neither was Shawne Williams. He still hurt the Pacers with his bad PR.

Shawne Williams' problems came on the heels of a bunch of problems with players who WERE very important.

It's hard to say what his impact would have been in a vacuum (i.e. if it was the only issue that had taken place for the couple of years previous), but I suspect it would have been much less.

I think we are in a position where bad PR leading to sending a guy packing is not optimal but isn't as destructive as in the past. As long as Lance is in a position to be sent packing cheaply, we're fine. If he keeps his nose clean and works his way up the ladder, then I think it is worth the risk.

Bear in mind I separate locker room from public. There are things that go on in the locker room that need to stay in the locker room and be dealt with there, only getting public if they can't be dealt with.

Scot Pollard
04-28-2011, 03:19 PM
People aren't stupid.

Even casual fans know this team has changed.

Maybe a little old lady who doesn't follow sports at all and watches the news saw this and probably finds any pro athlete to be like that.

This whole "stuck in the past" thing is long over with. In fact, I haven't heard anyone call the Pacers thugs for like 3 years now.

The attendance is low because the team has sucked.

I'm not saying the off the court arrested didn't play a part in that because it definitely did. I'll admit, I was scared out of my mind when this **** happened. ****in Tinsley and ****heads ruining a beautiful city as Indianapolis.

Even after the brawl, people still attended games to see a winning team.

Anyway, now that we've shown we're back in the playoffs, the people will be coming back. Even new fans like those who hopped on the Colts bandwagon when they first really became good and the Pacers slipped.

In fact, the city should be fortunate that the Pacers and Colts of today have good people on their rosters and not causing trouble. I know I am. Makes me feel safer and enjoy sports better.

They are portraying the true way of Indiana sports.

Isaac
04-28-2011, 03:20 PM
Yes, I did, after the game at Dallas.

I typically don't hold back my thoughts.

The first half he played in Dallas was extremely impressive. He was terrific in the PnR with Tyler.

Other than that we didn't see enough of Lance to keep raving about his PG skills, so I don't know why anyone would expect UB or anyone else to keep harping on it.

Unclebuck
04-28-2011, 03:26 PM
The first half he played in Dallas was extremely impressive. He was terrific in the PnR with Tyler.

Other than that we didn't see enough of Lance to keep raving about his PG skills, so I don't know why anyone would expect UB or anyone else to keep harping on it.


I must not be harping on it as I was accused in this thread of saying this for the first time today. if you go back and look at how many posts I have ever made about Lance, they have been very few and far between, in fact I've posted more about him today than I ever have.

He's got talent, but there are a ton of issues with him and it seems to me that he is unlikely to ever reach even a small portion of his potential.

Justin Tyme
04-28-2011, 04:07 PM
Yes, I did, after the game at Dallas.

I typically don't hold back my thoughts.


I stand corrected! I just don't remember you having ever made your views about Stephenson public b4. I know it's your opinion on Stephenson, but I can't see how a small sampling of games leads you to this statement. You come across to me as being methodical in your thinking and not making outlandish commentss in your posts... other than when you were defending Jimmy. :D I guess I'm just surprised you see that in Stephenson after only a handfull of games.

IndyPacer
04-28-2011, 05:37 PM
I guess I don't see why it's so urgent that Stephenson should be immediately dismissed. He's done stupid things, and he lost all his playing time as a result. I'd say give him at least another year. If our players are too intimidated to keep a 19-year-old kid in line, Lance is the least of our worries. I'd agree with Bird regarding keeping him unless they think he's going to do something severely disruptive. If he runs his mouth again, NBDL his *** for awhile until he learns his place.

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 06:45 PM
You really want to bring that up again? The things that Brandon is inconsistent with isn't his three point shooting, its everything else...

Reading what he said about Paul George, wow. One of the 5 best young guys he's ever been around? That is some high praise coming from Larry Bird. Another reason I think this kid will be special for us.

Not tryin to dis you bro , but Bird says a lot of things like that about his guys

Saranus
Travis Deiner he said was the best shooter in the league
How good Stanko and Lozek would be

The list goes on and on

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 06:46 PM
"Unless he does something crazy..."

Those words will haunt us one of these days folks...haunt us.

Maybe, but maybe not

I mean my God, aren't the Pacers overdue for some good luck for once?

BillS
04-28-2011, 06:49 PM
Travis Deiner he said was the best shooter in the league

No.

He said he was going to get ONE of the best shooters in the league, then later he signed Travis Diener. One could infer he <i>meant</i> Diener was one of the best shooters in the league, but he never <i>said</i> it.

One could also infer that Bird meant to sign someone else but it fell through and he never came out and admitted/explained it. That would completely invalidate the first inference if true.

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 06:50 PM
Absolutely! Stephenson cares the feces out of me! His propensity for doing harm to the franchise isn't worth it. Bird knows it too, but hopes Stephenson "will get it in the very near future." He admits he causes problems, and yet sticks his head in the sand. Love of talent can only go so far when it's the franchise future at stake. It's like with Artest. It wasn't if he'd cause another problem but when.

You know what my friend, if you really think about it, Artest really wasnt that bad at all. Never any off court drama with police etc.

A knucklehead, sure but not a cancer in my opinion

also, Lance might get it or might not, I would rather give him a chance. I dont get it when people act like he could hurt us soo bad

Worst case scenerio we cut him next year. He is not a max contract player, or anything close like that at this time. I think people are giving Lance too much power.

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 06:52 PM
I hope to hell he's not banking on Stephenson for anything. Especially to be our leading scorer.

And I'm someone who sees the talent.

I heard Lance rescued 15 orphans from a buring church in New Castle

;)

speakout4
04-28-2011, 06:55 PM
I think he's banking on Stephenson. I can't say which coach but I was told off the record last summer they were worried about his head/maturity, but he had the talent to be more than an allstar. We're talking Deron Williams, Carmello Anthony skills.
I don't think he has that kind of talent but we need talent period.

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 06:55 PM
I agree. I think Bird has given Lance too long of a leash here that he could eventually hang himself with. The message to me is that "hey, we will keep putting up with your crap and indiscretions, as long as you don't get arrested." Hello Tinsley Part II.

I disagree

What has Lance really done ?

He was not convicted, and yes he get in trouble for "unspecified violation of team rules"

Please stop (not you personally) compairing people like Tinsley to Lance. Tinsley was lazy and already 25 when drafted. Lance might be 6'5 but he is mentally a kid of 15. So he might do stupid ****, but nothing major

He does have the potential to be a star and I am willing to take the very small risk of another year, as I mentioned he makes 750K, peanuts in an NBA salary world and very easy to let go of

Hoop
04-28-2011, 07:05 PM
Sounds like someone who has no interest in the Pacers one way or another and probably has not purchased a ticket since Reggie retired.
Not entirely true. One of the suites I was in this season where Pacer ticket people were trying to get new and former ticket holders to sign up, I was completely shocked at some of the things that were said.

The were a few older couples that said they were scared to come to Pacer games because they were afraid for their safety. I actually laughed at them before I realized they were serious, it really blew me away.

So the Pacers are thugs belief, ran way deeper than I ever believed.

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 07:11 PM
[QUOTE=Thingfish;1226949]

The main one being that Lance isn't our most important player. /QUOTE]


Neither was Shawne Williams. He still hurt the Pacers with his bad PR.

What some don't seem to get is that the average Indiana citizen who isn't a diehard fan still associates the Pacers as thugs. They don't understand those players are gone now, so if Stephenson creates a PR nightmare those citizens see the SOS with the Pacers. How many times have I been told by people that they haven't followed the Pacers since the fight in Detroit,
and all the player off the court problems. They got fed up with "THOSE" Pacers, and aren't interested in the team anymore. Nothing proves this out more than the loss in attendance.

It irrates the stuffings out of me to read posters say I don't care about the player causing problems as long as we win. That attitude is nothing more than selfishness to get an end result with disregard to the potential harm to your so called beloved Pacers. It's hard to overcome a bad reputation once you have one. It takes time with NO MORE PR PROBLEMS. That's right NO MORE PR PROBLEMS.

And whats the opposite choice?

nice guys with a low key demeanor and little love for the game like Dun for example?


SHHHHT take me back to 2004 over the chior boys anydays

dont get me wrong I would love to have both but there are very few Kevin Durrants (killer on the court, nice guy off it)

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 07:15 PM
The fact that I want Frank Vogel back, makes me want Bird back too.

The fact that Bird is this much in love with Lance, that he ignores the fact that his teammates can't stand him, he's screwed up 4 times already..shows a side of Bird that the Jim O'brien thing showed. He's stubborn. Possibly too stubborn for the team's good.

Thats a very overgeneralization Sook,

I doub every team memeber "cant stand him"

remember the pictures from Bubs burgers ? Or Dahanty and him pllaying around?

I still satnd by that I believe Lance called out some vets and he was exactly right

People dont usually get upset unless deep down they think some of it is true

Im sorry but we need an alpha male that can score. Ty is the only current alpha male on the team besides Lance

BillS
04-28-2011, 07:18 PM
And whats the opposite choice?

nice guys with a low key demeanor and little love for the game like Dun for example?

Why do people somehow think Dunleavy doesn't care about the game? I'd stay injured and spend my time on the bench with my money rather than busting my butt to get back into shape and spending my time running around constantly on the floor and getting blamed for everything by fans of my home team every year if I didn't care.

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 07:18 PM
Yes, I did, after the game at Dallas.

I typically don't hold back my thoughts.

No doubt, I heard it live and in person from the hourses mouth

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 07:20 PM
Huh? The kid is a selfish scorer with poor fundamentals, poor shot selection, and a body and skillset somewhere between a SG and SF. The day Stephenson has an assist-to-turnover ratio north of +3 or makes more than 40% of his shots is the day the Pacers draw a charge at the United Center on Derrick Rose.

He has already dune it dude, 3 times in limited play

Against Dallas, OKC, and I believe Houston

he had 6 assists in 12 minutes

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 07:22 PM
No.

He said he was going to get ONE of the best shooters in the league, then later he signed Travis Diener. One could infer he <i>meant</i> Diener was one of the best shooters in the league, but he never <i>said</i> it.

One could also infer that Bird meant to sign someone else but it fell through and he never came out and admitted/explained it. That would completely invalidate the first inference if true.

You are correct

but my point stands that Bird has used a lot of hyberily (sp?) before in discussing his guys

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 07:24 PM
Why do people somehow think Dunleavy doesn't care about the game? I'd stay injured and spend my time on the bench with my money rather than busting my butt to get back into shape and spending my time running around constantly on the floor and getting blamed for everything by fans of my home team every year if I didn't care.

You are right Bill, I thought about it and thats an unfair statement about Dun, him coming back from injury proved that

What I meant is Dun is an example of a good guy and nice player but will never have the "gene" that people like Kobe, Wade, Dirk, Durrant have

gummy
04-28-2011, 07:40 PM
I don't have time to go through the whole thread to see if this has already been mentioned. If so, I apologize. But in addition to Tyler's comments after game 4 we have Dahntay's endorsement of Vogel returning today:

"
That confidence earned the respect of the players. Guard Dahntay Jones (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2008/dahntay-jones) hopes Vogel returns.


"It would be a breath of fresh air to know we have some stability and some consistency," Jones said. "Frank's done an excellent job in the interim. When he's coaching us, the focus is on the positive, helping us get better, helping us find a niche. He's done a great job with us."


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=6443700

90'sNBARocked
04-28-2011, 09:24 PM
I don't have time to go through the whole thread to see if this has already been mentioned. If so, I apologize. But in addition to Tyler's comments after game 4 we have Dahntay's endorsement of Vogel returning today:

"
That confidence earned the respect of the players. Guard Dahntay Jones (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2008/dahntay-jones) hopes Vogel returns.


"It would be a breath of fresh air to know we have some stability and some consistency," Jones said. "Frank's done an excellent job in the interim. When he's coaching us, the focus is on the positive, helping us get better, helping us find a niche. He's done a great job with us."


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=6443700


DJ is just a classy guy. He never ripped on OBIE who treated him like ***

BobbyMac
04-28-2011, 09:53 PM
Bob Kravitz with three straight good columns! I'll be darn!

Yeah, he didn't even stab anyone in the back....could it be he's growing up? That would be real nice.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 11:48 AM
"He's a top-30 player," Bird said. "I've always thought he could be an All-Star and he's close, but he's not there yet. I didn't think he was as committed consistently as he's been in the past. It would be really nice if he could be our second scorer.''
This is quite a quote from Bird. He basically called out Danny for not being committed all the time.

Not for poor shooting. Not for struggling. But for lack of commitment.

He's also made it clear this team has no leader.

In the press conference he also said if he was on the team, he'd have no problem with Lance. He'd look past the irritations and be more concerned about getting a serious scorer involved who could take the team to the next level. (Can you imagine Bird complaining that McHale was getting too many touches?)

I am leaning towards the idea that Lance called out Danny for the same things Bird did. Lance may not have had the standing to do so, but apparently Danny also didn't have the maturity to deal with it. So he was acting like a child as well.

Lance's "conduct detrimental to the team" may have been something very different than what we thought.

And maybe Bird thinks Lance should be scorer number one. Hmmmmm.

daschysta
04-29-2011, 12:29 PM
If lance can't act like a damn rookie and know his role he's more trouble than he's worth. An unproven second round rookie has no place calling out the vets, let alone the top guy on the team.

And if you want to talk about commitment, how about constantly screwing up off the court as a rookie, who isn't going to be worth anything if he messes up this last chance.

Sookie
04-29-2011, 12:41 PM
Thats a very overgeneralization Sook,

I doub every team memeber "cant stand him"

remember the pictures from Bubs burgers ? Or Dahanty and him pllaying around?

I still satnd by that I believe Lance called out some vets and he was exactly right

People dont usually get upset unless deep down they think some of it is true

Im sorry but we need an alpha male that can score. Ty is the only current alpha male on the team besides Lance

I'm just going by what a few people, who know a few guys on the team, have blatantly said here.

All of them are Alpha Males, except maybe Brandon. I'd say 96% of the NBA is alpha males. That's not necessarily a good thing, but that's how sports work.

And people get upset when other people are being a pain in the butt. Regardless of whether Lance was "right" or not (which I doubt) he shouldn't have said anything. You have to know your place.

I don't think the locker room problems were all on Lance, but I think he played a major role.

I also think, in Danny's case, Danny might not have felt that the Pacer's were 100% committed to getting better. Larry kept around JOB way too long. Then he fell in love with Lance (remember, Danny was one of the few guys around during the bad years..) and now he's probably going to go after Mayo.

Perhaps Danny felt like Larry hadn't learned, or wasn't doing his part. I think I'd be frustrated. Like "We've got some young talent, we're finally a level headed team..but our coach won't play our young talent, and Larry is in love with the idea of making a few team cancers a part of our team."

I think you have to take anything Larry says about Lance with a grain of salt. Just like you had to take anything he said about Jim O'brien with a grain of salt. Larry's infatuated with Lance. That can put some blinders on him.

But I do think he's right, if Lance was say..on the Lakers, he wouldn't have caused a problem in the locker room. Because Kobe would have put a stop to it immediately or Kobe would have cut him, himself. We don't have that guy. Dahntay tries to be, but I just don't think he has that natural leadership ability. And that doesn't mean Lance isn't a cancer. He's gotten cut from teams for being a cancer. It's part of his history. And I don't really blame Danny or any other player that feels like their job isn't to babysit this guy.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 12:44 PM
I think to the other players Lance is like that annoying puppy that always pisses on the carpet and tries to attack your friends when they come over.

The question is how long do you let him keep pissing on the carpet?

pacer4ever
04-29-2011, 01:00 PM
I think to the other players Lance is like that annoying puppy that always pisses on the carpet and tries to attack your friends when they come over.

The question is how long do you let him keep pissing on the carpet?

I had a puupy like that along time ago i trained him and now he is a good mature dog . I could have took him to the pound that would have been easy but i sticked with him and trained him.

Tom White
04-29-2011, 01:01 PM
I know Lance loves to stir up the ****, but personally, I don't give a crap :p

Seriously though... There is a huge difference between Lance and Artest. The main one being that Lance isn't our most important player. If Lance does something stupid... big deal. We move on and slightly ponder what could have been after DC dribbles the ball off his foot for the 3rd time in a game.

Therein is the difference between a fan, and a member of the Pacers. Let me explain.

As a fan, we have to put up with/enjoy/hate or whatever each of the players only when we watch a game. That is, unless the player does something that is in the paper for a number of days.

The members of the team/oranization have to put up with/enjoy/hate or whatever that player every day of the season. It is much more wearing on those people and would have a greater effect on them than on us.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 01:15 PM
I had a puupy like that along time ago i trained him and now he is a good mature dog . I could have took him to the pound that would have been easy but i sticked with him and trained him.

Sure, but now imagine every time your dog pissed on the carpet you had to have a media clean up because of it.

90'sNBARocked
04-29-2011, 01:26 PM
I'm just going by what a few people, who know a few guys on the team, have blatantly said here.

All of them are Alpha Males, except maybe Brandon. I'd say 96% of the NBA is alpha males. That's not necessarily a good thing, but that's how sports work.

And people get upset when other people are being a pain in the butt. Regardless of whether Lance was "right" or not (which I doubt) he shouldn't have said anything. You have to know your place.

I don't think the locker room problems were all on Lance, but I think he played a major role.

I also think, in Danny's case, Danny might not have felt that the Pacer's were 100% committed to getting better. Larry kept around JOB way too long. Then he fell in love with Lance (remember, Danny was one of the few guys around during the bad years..) and now he's probably going to go after Mayo.

Perhaps Danny felt like Larry hadn't learned, or wasn't doing his part. I think I'd be frustrated. Like "We've got some young talent, we're finally a level headed team..but our coach won't play our young talent, and Larry is in love with the idea of making a few team cancers a part of our team."

I think you have to take anything Larry says about Lance with a grain of salt. Just like you had to take anything he said about Jim O'brien with a grain of salt. Larry's infatuated with Lance. That can put some blinders on him.

But I do think he's right, if Lance was say..on the Lakers, he wouldn't have caused a problem in the locker room. Because Kobe would have put a stop to it immediately or Kobe would have cut him, himself. We don't have that guy. Dahntay tries to be, but I just don't think he has that natural leadership ability. And that doesn't mean Lance isn't a cancer. He's gotten cut from teams for being a cancer. It's part of his history. And I don't really blame Danny or any other player that feels like their job isn't to babysit this guy.

First I personally dont agree with the bolded part. If DG or whomever, is not playing hard or with intensity, I want ANYONE to challenge that. IF he was bothered becuase it came from a rookies mouth, then maybe Danny should look in the mirror and ask himself is their truth to what he is saying

Also feel to say Bird is "infuated" with Lance is an unfair statement to me becuase it implys Bird is blind and cant judge talent, charcture etc.

daschysta
04-29-2011, 01:40 PM
First I personally dont agree with the bolded part. If DG or whomever, is not playing hard or with intensity, I want ANYONE to challenge that. IF he was bothered becuase it came from a rookies mouth, then maybe Danny should look in the mirror and ask himself is their truth to what he is saying

Also feel to say Bird is "infuated" with Lance is an unfair statement to me becuase it implys Bird is blind and cant judge talent, charcture etc.

Bird is not above reproach as a judge of character. Also whatever lance did corresponded with our 6 game losign streak. Whatever he was doing I hope he never does it again.

BillS
04-29-2011, 01:52 PM
This is quite a quote from Bird. He basically called out Danny for not being committed all the time.

Not for poor shooting. Not for struggling. But for lack of commitment.

He's also made it clear this team has no leader.

In the press conference he also said if he was on the team, he'd have no problem with Lance. He'd look past the irritations and be more concerned about getting a serious scorer involved who could take the team to the next level. (Can you imagine Bird complaining that McHale was getting too many touches?)

I am leaning towards the idea that Lance called out Danny for the same things Bird did. Lance may not have had the standing to do so, but apparently Danny also didn't have the maturity to deal with it. So he was acting like a child as well.

Lance's "conduct detrimental to the team" may have been something very different than what we thought.

And maybe Bird thinks Lance should be scorer number one. Hmmmmm.

Where in the world are you getting this chain of logic? It's like an "if A, then B. If B then C. Therefore DEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ."

All of these things don't have any demonstrable connection to one another. So Larry would be able to ignore the irritation - why does that imply it really isn't an irritation, it's something constructive? It is much more likely to imply that Bird can focus on basketball and not give a c**p about rookies being locker room dummies.

So Danny was called out by Bird for being inconsistent - why does this imply that the issue was Lance calling out Danny?

And, just because Larry likes Lance's talent and potential, why does that imply that his disruption is because he's the only guy on the team calling anyone out while everyone else is sitting with their thumbs in their ... mouths?

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 01:55 PM
Bird is not above reproach as a judge of character. Also whatever lance did corresponded with our 6 game losign streak. Whatever he was doing I hope he never does it again.
I don't think that's right. The losing started a couple games before Lance started playing. And I bet Lance's +/- was a lot better than the team's.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 01:56 PM
Bird thinks Lance should be scorer number 1? THe guy barely frakkin' played this year! Blue steel? Ferrari? La tigra? They're the same face! Can't anyone notice this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 02:01 PM
Bird thinks Lance should be scorer number 1? THe guy barely frakkin' played this year! Blue steel? Ferrari? La tigra? They're the same face! Can't anyone notice this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

One of the reasons he barely played, perhaps it seems, is that a diva or two was afraid he might become the leading scorer.

BillS
04-29-2011, 02:01 PM
I don't think that's right. The losing started a couple games before Lance started playing. And I bet Lance's +/- was a lot better than the team's.

The first game of the losing streak was the Thunder on March 2. Lance played 20 minutes.

Take out the Golden State win and assume the streak REALLY started with Utah, and Lance was dressed but did not play in the Utah loss but played 4 minutes in the Phoenix loss.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:03 PM
One of the reasons he barely played, perhaps it seems, is that a diva or two was afraid he might become the leading scorer.

Oh give me a break. He wasn't even the leading scorer on his college team.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 02:03 PM
Where in the world are you getting this chain of logic? It's like an "if A, then B. If B then C. Therefore DEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ."

All of these things don't have any demonstrable connection to one another. So Larry would be able to ignore the irritation - why does that imply it really isn't an irritation, it's something constructive? It is much more likely to imply that Bird can focus on basketball and not give a c**p about rookies being locker room dummies.

So Danny was called out by Bird for being inconsistent - why does this imply that the issue was Lance calling out Danny?

And, just because Larry likes Lance's talent and potential, why does that imply that his disruption is because he's the only guy on the team calling anyone out while everyone else is sitting with their thumbs in their ... mouths?

It's not a chain of logic. It's a chain of suggestions. I am allowed to suggest, am I not?

And Bird didn't say he could simply "ignore locker room dummies." He said he would be trying to get a guy like Lance on the court and scoring big. Here's exactly what Bird said:


The one thing we don't have in there is a leader. If I played with Lance I would have no problem. I know Lance Stephenson can play basketball and I would do everything in my power to get him on the court because if he's on the court and he's one of our better players, he wins games for us.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 02:05 PM
Oh give me a break. He wasn't even the leading scorer on his college team.
You need to call Larry Bird and tell him this breaking news.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:06 PM
You need to call Larry Bird and tell him this breaking news.

Some of you need to stop believing all the hype around this kid.

So far the most memorable moment of Lance Stephenson as a Pacer caught on video involves him being violated by a couple of prostitutes.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 02:08 PM
Some of you need to stop believing all the hype around this kid.
The "you" happens to be the Pacers' head of Basketball Operations.

90'sNBARocked
04-29-2011, 02:09 PM
I think everyone associated with the Pacers have commented on Lance having outstanding ability and potential

Quite possibly Lance upset people by beleiving in his abilities and not backing down, which might have drawn the ire of Vets who might have been a little jealous of the attention he received

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:11 PM
The "you" happens to be the Pacers' head of Basketball Operations.

Yes.

90'sNBARocked
04-29-2011, 02:11 PM
Some of you need to stop believing all the hype around this kid.

So far the most memorable moment of Lance Stephenson as a Pacer caught on video involves him being violated by a couple of prostitutes.

I disgaree

First I dont know what you expecetd Lance to "prove" HE played in a total of roughly 10-12 games this year in limited minutes

In that time he showed to be the best passing guard on the tteam. He averaged more assists than AJ while playing 1/10 th of the time

He had some highlight passes and drives

You got to remember Joe, we were not able to see Lance in practice and all who have raved about his ability, even his so called enemy Wells

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:12 PM
I think everyone associated with the Pacers have commented on Lance having outstanding ability and potential

Quite possibly Lance upset people by beleiving in his abilities and not backing down, which might have drawn the ire of Vets who might have been a little jealous of the attention he received

The attention he received? Outside of the Pacers brass who are only trying to toot their own horns because they drafted him, Lance hasn't gotten very much attention at all nationally since he left high school.

If people on our team are jealous of Lance we have some serious issues.

Since86
04-29-2011, 02:12 PM
TJ......

A lot of people with a lot of NBA experience has said Lance is talented. That list doesn't just include Larry Bird, but also people like Mr. Boyle.

Are you saying they're liars or just bad judges of talent?

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:15 PM
TJ......

A lot of people with a lot of NBA experience has said Lance is talented. That list doesn't just include Larry Bird, but also people like Mr. Boyle.

Are you saying they're liars or just bad judges of talent?

I'm saying on this case, they are wrong. Everyone is fallible.

If Lance ever develops into a big time NBA player, I will be downright shocked. If it benefits the Pacers, I'll be thrilled and I'll eat the plate fulls of crow til I burst, but I don't see it...at all.

He played in TWELVE games. His legal issues were behind him by February, he could have played the rest of the year if that was the hold up, but it clearly isn't only that. In his 10 mpg, he managed to shoot 33% from the field, average almost as many turnovers as assists, etc. Maybe he would have been more successful playing off the ball (read as definitely more successful), but apparently TPTB have so much faith in him they think he's gonna be a point guard.

Yeah, well I'll believe that when I see it.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:17 PM
I disgaree

First I dont know what you expecetd Lance to "prove" HE played in a total of roughly 10-12 games this year in limited minutes

In that time he showed to be the best passing guard on the tteam. He averaged more assists than AJ while playing 1/10 th of the time

He had some highlight passes and drives

You got to remember Joe, we were not able to see Lance in practice and all who have raved about his ability, even his so called enemy Wells

If he was so great in practice, how come he never played in games? Because the Pacers were so loaded? Because he's just that big of a pain in the butt?

People raved about Paul's ability, and guess what Paul actually played.

Lance will never be the best scorer on the Pacers...ever. Never ever.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:19 PM
TJ......

A lot of people with a lot of NBA experience has said Lance is talented. That list doesn't just include Larry Bird, but also people like Mr. Boyle.

Are you saying they're liars or just bad judges of talent?

Also, for all the praise the Pacers brass is given him. 30 NBA teams didn't see fit to spend a first round draft pick on him. Which is a more indicative and wide ranging indication of his talent?

BillS
04-29-2011, 02:21 PM
TJ......

A lot of people with a lot of NBA experience has said Lance is talented. That list doesn't just include Larry Bird, but also people like Mr. Boyle.

Are you saying they're liars or just bad judges of talent?

I know you didn't ask me but it provides a place for me to inject what I think is being missed here.

People are saying that since Larry thinks Lance is so talented and if he played with him would try to get him on the floor in spite of what he would have to put up with, this somehow means anything Lance did in the locker room was justifiable and anyone on the team who got upset at him is just some kind of jealous a$$.

I find that extremely hard to believe, and also would think that if it was the case Lance would have continued playing and other players would have been made to put up or shut up. The fact that Lance lost his playing time and then was "demoted" after another locker room incident pretty much indicates he was NOT in the right about what he did.

Agreeing that Lance has huge upside does not somehow mean agreeing that everyone overreacted to his actions.

Sookie
04-29-2011, 02:21 PM
I think there's a very big difference between having "basketball talent" and being able to incorporate it into a team setting.

Lance may have talent. I'm not sure. His game isn't the type of game I like. But it is flashy and highlight worthy, which catches a lot of peoples eye.

That does not mean he is capable of using his talent to help the team win.

Honestly, I don't buy that it's just chemistry issues that kept him off the court. Cousins played this year. West played last season. Plenty of role playing cancerous guys have gotten time this year. Maybe we couldn't afford to to play Lance because we didn't have a guy to bat down his ego.

Or maybe, despite however much talent Lance has, it wasn't the type of talent that could apply itself well to helping the team win. That doesn't mean, that at some point if he develops and grows up, that he could be the type of player that helps a team win, and that his talent could be used well. But he's clearly not there right now. And that's part of the reason why he didn't play.

Since86
04-29-2011, 02:22 PM
Also, for all the praise the Pacers brass is given him. 30 NBA teams didn't see fit to spend a first round draft pick on him. Which is a more indicative and wide ranging indication of his talent?

Come on now.... Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas etc

Besides that, I find it funny you can say they're wrong when they saw him all year at practice, and you saw him a total of 114 minutes.

Maybe you're right, but there's no way you can say they're wrong with such a small sample size compared to their much larger sample size.

Not right now anyways.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:24 PM
I mean if the guy is really the best scorer on the Pacers, aren't you telling everyone else to fall in line behind him?

It's just silly. I have a lot more evidence supporting my claim than those saying he's so talented. We've barely seen him play, and I love Mr. Boyle to death as an announcer and I like most of Bird's player personnel moves, but a post on a forum and some glamor quotes to the media, aren't enough for me to buy in. Especially when I watched him at Cincy, and I watched clips of him in high school. NBA body? Hell yes he has an NBA body, but so did David Harrison.

Since86
04-29-2011, 02:27 PM
I know you didn't ask me but it provides a place for me to inject what I think is being missed here.

People are saying that since Larry thinks Lance is so talented and if he played with him would try to get him on the floor in spite of what he would have to put up with, this somehow means anything Lance did in the locker room was justifiable and anyone on the team who got upset at him is just some kind of jealous a$$.

I find that extremely hard to believe, and also would think that if it was the case Lance would have continued playing and other players would have been made to put up or shut up. The fact that Lance lost his playing time and then was "demoted" after another locker room incident pretty much indicates he was NOT in the right about what he did.

Agreeing that Lance has huge upside does not somehow mean agreeing that everyone overreacted to his actions.

I don't disagree with any of that.

My objections are solely based upon on-court production, and nothing else.

We just haven't seen enough of him to form any type of valid opinion. Some times he looked really good, other times he looked like a second round player. Which one is he? I don't know. I need more time to watch him play.

But that doesn't discount the fact that others inside the organization has seen far more than we have, and they say he's really talented.

I don't think we can deny that, but I think we can question whether he will be able to get the mental aspect of it.

I'm just saying formulating an opinion on his play, with the sample size given, is premature.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:28 PM
Come on now.... Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas etc

Besides that, I find it funny you can say they're wrong when they saw him all year at practice, and you saw him a total of 114 minutes.

Maybe you're right, but there's no way you can say they're wrong with such a small sample size compared to their much larger sample size.

Not right now anyways.

I love the Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas stuff, because the correlation is so tiny compared to the number of successful players that have been drafted early in the first round.

Isn't only seeing him this season for a total of 114 minutes indicative enough? Arenas his rookie year played in 47 games, started 30 of them and averaged 25 mpg. Tony Parker his rookie year played 77 games, started 72 of them and averaged 29 mpg (On a 58 win Spurs team). Even Monta Ellis played in 49 games his rookie year, started 3 of them and averaged 19 mpg.

Yet Lance Stephenson (who we've just compared to 2 of those 3 guys) can barely sniff playing time on a 37 win team? Again I will say if he's as good as those guys and he still can't find time, HOW CRAZY IS HE?

Also, PG might be hard to learn as far as position goes, but good guards, real, good, talented guards, ESPECIALLY combo guards, will get playing time.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 02:29 PM
If people on our team are jealous of Lance we have some serious issues.
Yes.

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:30 PM
Why is Lance only receiving playing time in 12 games completely disregarded as significant evidence against his talent level?

Since86
04-29-2011, 02:38 PM
I love the Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas stuff, because the correlation is so tiny compared to the number of successful players that have been drafted early in the first round.

But it's possible, that's the point. You can't automatically disqualify him because where he was selected. Obviously 2nd rounders have value, or there wouldn't be a second round.



Isn't only seeing him this season for a total of 114 minutes indicative enough? Arenas his rookie year played in 47 games, started 30 of them and averaged 25 mpg. Tony Parker his rookie year played 77 games, started 72 of them and averaged 29 mpg (On a 58 win Spurs team). Even Monta Ellis played in 49 games his rookie year, started 3 of them and averaged 19 mpg.

Yet Lance Stephenson (who we've just compared to 2 of those 3 guys) can barely sniff playing time on a 37 win team? Again I will say if he's as good as those guys and he still can't find time, HOW CRAZY IS HE?

Also, PG might be hard to learn as far as position goes, but good guards, real, good, talented guards, ESPECIALLY combo guards, will get playing time.

And you're forgetting the two most important aspects of the argument.

1) He couldn't get off the bench until his legal problems went away
2) Jim O'Brien was the coach.....

Trader Joe
04-29-2011, 02:39 PM
1.) His legal problems went away in early February.
2.) Frank Vogel was the coach this entire time period.

Normally, a young talented players minutes trend up once they get their chance. Lance's went up for about 3 games, plateaued at 20, then came crashing back down.

Since86
04-29-2011, 02:45 PM
1.) His legal problems went away in early February.
2.) Frank Vogel was the coach this entire time period.

Normally, a young talented players minutes trend up once they get their chance. Lance's went up for about 3 games, plateaued at 20, then came crashing back down.

Due to off-court problems.

The Pacers were fighting tooth and nail to get the last playoff spot during that time, and he rocked the boat. You have to cut his minutes back, if you want to make the playoffs, and they did just that.

Coming in 3/4ths of the season in is a pretty difficult situation to handle, not only for Lance, but the entire organization.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 02:55 PM
So who do you think Bird is talking about in the following quote? It's certainly more than one player, and I'm not convinced Lance is the main guy Bird is talking about:


One of our problems this year (was) we didn't have a positive locker room all year. I addressed that with some players yesterday. They understood. They know I'm not happy about it and we're going to make some changes there. I've been in this league for so long, I know in your locker room you don't have to hug and kiss each other every time you come in. It doesn't work that way. But you've got to respect one another. You've got to be professional about the way you do your business. And I expect that out of my players. We addressed all that. The guys said they understand and it'll never happen again. But I came back and said, "If it does happen and I'm here, you won't be here." We're not having that anymore. I think it cost us some games this year and it's going to be interesting because there are some guys that need to grow up and be professional about their job.

BillS
04-29-2011, 03:24 PM
So who do you think Bird is talking about in the following quote? It's certainly more than one player, and I'm not convinced Lance is the main guy Bird is talking about:

Oh, I'm not saying some of the other guys might not have reacted badly. But it doesn't follow that Lance was somehow right and not at fault just because it takes two to tango.

I think Lance was doing more messing around than a rookie has a right to do, and not about something that he was "correct" to "call out" a veteran about. That's HIS no-no. Then, I think some of the other guys took it too seriously and got into it with him. That's THEIR no-no. I think since HE instigated it is why he rather vanished. Since THEY reacted is why Larry uses plurals when saying it won't happen again.

I think Larry is saying that HE wouldn't have been bothered by what Lance was doing and wants him on the floor for his talent to develop into something useful. This would be why he got on the other guys about BEING bothered. That's why he called out the lack of a leader, because a team leader would have made sure it stopped before it got bad enough the GM would have to step in. He didn't call out the lack of a leader as a way to imply Danny was at fault and Lance was legitimate in his actions.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 03:33 PM
Oh, I'm not saying some of the other guys might not have reacted badly. But it doesn't follow that Lance was somehow right and not at fault just because it takes two to tango.

I think Lance was doing more messing around than a rookie has a right to do, and not about something that he was "correct" to "call out" a veteran about. That's HIS no-no. Then, I think some of the other guys took it too seriously and got into it with him. That's THEIR no-no. I think since HE instigated it is why he rather vanished. Since THEY reacted is why Larry uses plurals when saying it won't happen again.

I think Larry is saying that HE wouldn't have been bothered by what Lance was doing and wants him on the floor for his talent to develop into something useful. This would be why he got on the other guys about BEING bothered. That's why he called out the lack of a leader, because a team leader would have made sure it stopped before it got bad enough the GM would have to step in. He didn't call out the lack of a leader as a way to imply Danny was at fault and Lance was legitimate in his actions.
Okay. All plausible.

Here's the Bird quote that makes me think it's not primarily Lance at issue:


we didn't have a positive locker room all year

Not sure, but I'm wondering if he's referring to some Granger/Hansbrough tension. I could definitely sense it.

BillS
04-29-2011, 03:36 PM
Not sure, but I'm wondering if he's referring to some Granger/Hansbrough tension. I could definitely sense it.

I'd agree Granger was probably involved, but I'd be more inclined to believe it was player/coach rather than player/player. Guys might not have disliked each other but would not have had much incentive to create a positive environment if they were disgruntled about the coach.

Hicks
04-29-2011, 04:00 PM
Not sure, but I'm wondering if he's referring to some Granger/Hansbrough tension. I could definitely sense it.

I took that quote to be referring to Jim O'Brien versus Frank Vogel. We didn't have a positive locker room all year... but we did once the coaching change happened.

McKeyFan
04-29-2011, 04:22 PM
I took that quote to be referring to Jim O'Brien versus Frank Vogel. We didn't have a positive locker room all year... but we did once the coaching change happened.

Perhaps. But let's look at the quote again. Several things about it seem to infer that it is not player/coach related. For starters, I assume "locker room" issues are player related. But who knows:


One of our problems this year (was) we didn't have a positive locker room all year. I addressed that with some players yesterday. They understood. They know I'm not happy about it and we're going to make some changes there. I've been in this league for so long, I know in your locker room you don't have to hug and kiss each other every time you come in. It doesn't work that way. But you've got to respect one another. You've got to be professional about the way you do your business. And I expect that out of my players. We addressed all that. The guys said they understand and it'll never happen again. But I came back and said, "If it does happen and I'm here, you won't be here." We're not having that anymore. I think it cost us some games this year and it's going to be interesting because there are some guys that need to grow up and be professional about their job.
Why would Bird make all these comments if the problem were JOB? That's been solved. There would be no point in making these difficult statements about not having it again. I don't think that's what he's referring to.

Trophy
04-29-2011, 04:26 PM
I went back in last few days and watched some archieves from this season and it really cracks me up how O'Brien went with the worst players like James Posey and Solomon Jones over either Tyler or Josh.

Really showed me how stupid he really was as the coach and what a surprise Vogel has been since he's been on that guy's staff for a while.

LA_Confidential
04-29-2011, 04:30 PM
First, I appreciate Larry's honesty about the players and team needs. Secondly, I am inspired by Larry's use of the words "us" and " we". He wants to run the draft so ultimately I think he will stay. Hope im not reading too deeply but if I am I hope im right.

Also, I like Coach Frank and would not be upset if he was retained but if we could nab Jerry Sloan or a coach near the class of Phil, Doc or Pop I say go for it.

90'sNBARocked
04-29-2011, 04:57 PM
I went back in last few days and watched some archieves from this season and it really cracks me up how O'Brien went with the worst players like James Posey and Solomon Jones over either Tyler or Josh.

Really showed me how stupid he really was as the coach and what a surprise Vogel has been since he's been on that guy's staff for a while.

Me too bro, but the one thing that stood out to me was Granger was much more of a volume scorer under Obie

90'sNBARocked
04-29-2011, 04:58 PM
If he was so great in practice, how come he never played in games? Because the Pacers were so loaded? Because he's just that big of a pain in the butt?

People raved about Paul's ability, and guess what Paul actually played.

Lance will never be the best scorer on the Pacers...ever. Never ever.

lol

you say that like its an undeniable , absolute fact

Tom White
04-29-2011, 06:49 PM
Bird thinks Lance should be scorer number 1? THe guy barely frakkin' played this year! Blue steel? Ferrari? La tigra? They're the same face! Can't anyone notice this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!

Bird did not say that. He said something like it would be great if Granger could be the number two scorer, with no mention of Lance. I took it to mean he was hoping they could land a player who is so good that the new guy could take over the number one role.

Tom White
04-29-2011, 06:51 PM
One of the reasons he barely played, perhaps it seems, is that a diva or two was afraid he might become the leading scorer.

So the "diva or two" made the decision for the coach as to who played and who didn't? I gotta say I've got doubts about that.

Justin Tyme
04-29-2011, 07:14 PM
Bird did not say that. He said something like it would be great if Granger could be the number two scorer, with no mention of Lance. I took it to mean he was hoping they could land a player who is so good that the new guy could take over the number one role.


That's how I took it as well. Bird's #2 want was a perimeter SCORER.

vnzla81
04-29-2011, 09:15 PM
I just got done listening to the interview and I like the part were Wells is asking about Lance and the problems in the lockeroom and Larry Bird tells him "come on Mike you know Lance was not the only guy" I also like his confidence regarding Lance and his willingness to keep him.