PDA

View Full Version : The Official "Was it Bird or Walsh?" Thread



switch
06-28-2012, 11:00 PM
Who do you think actually called the shots during the draft tonight?



And which one decided to trade for Murph-leavy?


Too soon??

Heisenberg
06-28-2012, 11:03 PM
Bird. Walsh.

/thread

PacerPenguins
06-28-2012, 11:05 PM
was all bird

MiaDragon
06-28-2012, 11:06 PM
When the guy sucks it will be blamed on the outgoing to try and save face, status quo for 125 S. Pennsylvania Street.

alamo1978
06-28-2012, 11:39 PM
I blame David Morway.

Hicks
06-28-2012, 11:44 PM
Pretty obvious it was Bird. I'm taking a vacation from defending him. Terrible. Hard to imagine a worse exit from him.

vnzla81
06-28-2012, 11:48 PM
Bird has his hands all over Plummet or whatever his name is, another "hard worker that knows how to play" bs pick.

pacer4ever
06-28-2012, 11:51 PM
I blame David Morway.

Not his fault but I see why he resigned. Wells said Bird didn't trust his scouting eye I think that's a compliment to Morway. I bet Morway got fired for saying Plumlee is awful.

Young
06-28-2012, 11:52 PM
I think Bird is the one who really likes Plumlee. With that said I think there was some kind of consensus among the front office and Coach Vogel. There are scouts, Kevin Pritchard, Bird, Donnie, and who knows what other player personnel who evaluate talent. These people see something in Plumlee that we don't. The majority of us go on a rampage after every draft but it has worked out in the end, hasn't it? Does everyone believe that Bird is the only one who see an NBA caliber player in Plumlee and just ran over everyone else in the organization to draft him?

We can disagree with the pick all we want. However, we should all take a step back and think about this. There were who knows how many different people within the organization scouting players in person, watching game film, watched workouts, interviewed players, checked references, and who knows what else. In the end, the decision was Miles Plumlee. They saw something in him they really like. Can't we all calm down and give him a chance?

pacer4ever
06-28-2012, 11:52 PM
Bird has his hands all over Plummet or whatever his name is, another "hard worker that knows how to play" be pick.

Except he isn't a hard worker and has no clue how to play basketball.

alamo1978
06-28-2012, 11:52 PM
Not his fault but I see why he resigned. Wells said Bird didn't trust his scouting eye I think that's a compliment to Morway. I bet Morway got fired for saying Plumlee is awful.

I was joking, but you may be onto something.

Trophy
06-28-2012, 11:53 PM
Well, Bird said he was going to be doing the draft.

pwee31
06-28-2012, 11:56 PM
Doesn't matter. Free agency will be the key to the offseason. The draft was just to fit in pieces. Needed a backup center, and Plumlee fits the bill. So many felt the Pacers win Heat series with a healthy Foster, well now you habe a healthy and more athletic Foster, or a 7th tall Lou with better offensive touch and feel for the game. He's gonna help the team, but let's wait for the team to be complete before we rush judgement. I was salty at first as well, but go look at film of Miles Plumlee

rm1369
06-29-2012, 12:06 AM
I think Bird is the one who really likes Plumlee. With that said I think there was some kind of consensus among the front office and Coach Vogel. There are scouts, Kevin Pritchard, Bird, Donnie, and who knows what other player personnel who evaluate talent. These people see something in Plumlee that we don't. The majority of us go on a rampage after every draft but it has worked out in the end, hasn't it? Does everyone believe that Bird is the only one who see an NBA caliber player in Plumlee and just ran over everyone else in the organization to draft him?

We can disagree with the pick all we want. However, we should all take a step back and think about this. There were who knows how many different people within the organization scouting players in person, watching game film, watched workouts, interviewed players, checked references, and who knows what else. In the end, the decision was Miles Plumlee. They saw something in him they really like. Can't we all calm down and give him a chance?

It's the same group that fell in love with Tyler ****ing Hansbrough. Another guy that nearly everyone knew would be a mediocre NBA player. Plumlee will likely play in the NBA for 10 years, just like Tyler, but he will be nothing more than a body to throw out their for 15 mins a night. A dime a dozen player - just like Tyler. In two years we will still be looking for a backup 5 just like we need a good backup 4 now. And PJIII will very likely be a young, up and coming player - just like Holiday is (who we passed on to take Tyler ****ing Hansbrough).

Pacersalltheway10
06-29-2012, 12:10 AM
GOOO PLUMLEEE . C'Mon give the dude a chance. Even if he turns out to be a McBob clone, that won't be a bad thing.

CableKC
06-29-2012, 12:41 AM
Based off of my opinion of Walsh being a "Swing for the fences" type of guy and Bird being a "Don't swing at anything so that we can hopefully get to 1st base on a Walk" type of guy....I'm going to lean towards this being a Bird pick. If Walsh was running the show....we'd have drafted Quincy Miller or even Perry Jones III.....but we decided to bunt and sprint towards 1st base.....so we ended up with Plumlee.

I have learned one thing from all of this.....when it comes to the draft and evaluating draft talent....it doesn't take much to truly impress Bird.

CableKC
06-29-2012, 12:43 AM
I think Bird is the one who really likes Plumlee. With that said I think there was some kind of consensus among the front office and Coach Vogel. There are scouts, Kevin Pritchard, Bird, Donnie, and who knows what other player personnel who evaluate talent. These people see something in Plumlee that we don't. The majority of us go on a rampage after every draft but it has worked out in the end, hasn't it? Does everyone believe that Bird is the only one who see an NBA caliber player in Plumlee and just ran over everyone else in the organization to draft him?

We can disagree with the pick all we want. However, we should all take a step back and think about this. There were who knows how many different people within the organization scouting players in person, watching game film, watched workouts, interviewed players, checked references, and who knows what else. In the end, the decision was Miles Plumlee. They saw something in him they really like. Can't we all calm down and give him a chance?
I am guessing that there are a myriad of Scouts and FO personnel from other Teams that watched Plumlee play as well...and I'm willing to bet that they didn't see the same thing...or at the very least not enough to justify picking him as the 26th pick.

Peck
06-29-2012, 12:59 AM
Based off of my opinion of Walsh being a "Swing for the fences" type of guy and Bird being a "Don't swing at anything so that we can hopefully get to 1st base on a Walk" type of guy....I'm going to lean towards this being a Bird pick. If Walsh was running the show....we'd have drafted Quincy Miller or even Perry Jones III.....but we decided to bunt and sprint towards 1st base.....so we ended up with Plumlee.

I have learned one thing from all of this.....when it comes to the draft and evaluating draft talent....it doesn't take much to truly impress Bird.

Wait, did you just say that Walsh was a swing for the fences kind of guy? Sorry I just had an out of body experiance there, because I thought that you were implying that Donnie "Do Nothing" as he was so often called (and not by me because I had another name for him) was the kind of person who was out actively making big time moves to win titles. I know that can't be what you meant.

Now as to the pick I'll say this. There has been enough evidence this evening presented to say that this is Bird, however this has the stink of Walsh all over it. Stuart Grey, Greg Dreiling, Scott Haskins, John Edwards, Primoz Brezac not to mention Zan Tabak or Greg Kite. All of these were Donnie Specials.

However I am willing to admit this sounds like Bird did this but I can't help but thinking that Walsh was sitting over in the corner smoking a cig. drinking a diet coke and cackling like Dr. Strangelove.

TheDon
06-29-2012, 02:32 AM
someone casting their hat into the ring for worst thread of the year award? very ambitious

CableKC
06-29-2012, 02:48 AM
Wait, did you just say that Walsh was a swing for the fences kind of guy? Sorry I just had an out of body experiance there, because I thought that you were implying that Donnie "Do Nothing" as he was so often called (and not by me because I had another name for him) was the kind of person who was out actively making big time moves to win titles. I know that can't be what you meant.

Now as to the pick I'll say this. There has been enough evidence this evening presented to say that this is Bird, however this has the stink of Walsh all over it. Stuart Grey, Greg Dreiling, Scott Haskins, John Edwards, Primoz Brezac not to mention Zan Tabak or Greg Kite. All of these were Donnie Specials.

However I am willing to admit this sounds like Bird did this but I can't help but thinking that Walsh was sitting over in the corner smoking a cig. drinking a diet coke and cackling like Dr. Strangelove.
I wasn't referring to Walsh as "Donnie Do Nothing".....I have always believed that Walsh was the type that fell in love with and chased potential ( see Bender, Artest and chasing then giving up on Anthony Randolph ). IMHO.......he was willing to go for the guy "that may not be fully proven but has high potential" over the guy that would be considered the "safe pick".

PR07
06-29-2012, 02:52 AM
It had to have been Bird, he said he was handling the draft. He did the homework and the research, and he made the call. He may want a mulligan on this one though in time.

Peck
06-29-2012, 02:52 AM
I have always believed that Walsh was the type to chased and fell in love with potential rather than substance ( see Bender, Artest and chasing then giving up on Anthony Randolph ).

Yea, old man Donnie did try and chase potential during the last part of his 24 year run with the club, however the previous 20 years with the club he was what you would call very conservative. He made one sided trades that benefited the club but those happened every few years and more often than not he tended to try and let the team grow together. I'm not saying it's a bad way of doing it but it certainly is not a swing for the fence mentality either.

CableKC
06-29-2012, 02:59 AM
Yea, old man Donnie did try and chase potential during the last part of his 24 year run with the club, however the previous 20 years with the club he was what you would call very conservative. He made one sided trades that benefited the club but those happened every few years and more often than not he tended to try and let the team grow together. I'm not saying it's a bad way of doing it but it certainly is not a swing for the fence mentality either.
I don't know if you are mis-reading the intent of my post....I'm not criticizing Walsh here.....I just think that both he and Bird have different approaches when it comes to evaluating and choosing the type of talent that they want on the team.

Justin Tyme
06-29-2012, 08:10 AM
GOOO PLUMLEEE . C'Mon give the dude a chance. Even if he turns out to be a McBob clone, that won't be a bad thing.


I'm not worried about him being a McBob clone, I'm worried about him being a Scott Haskins clone! Who btw was a Walsh pick.

My advice to the FO is re-sign Fez.

Rogco
06-29-2012, 08:17 AM
GOOO PLUMLEEE . C'Mon give the dude a chance. Even if he turns out to be a McBob clone, that won't be a bad thing.

Why would you pick a player you have to develop into a clone of a mediocre bench rider who is actually younger than the player you picked???

Justin Tyme
06-29-2012, 08:20 AM
this has the stink of Walsh all over it. Stuart Grey, Greg Dreiling, Scott Haskins, John Edwards, Primoz Brezac not to mention Zan Tabak or Greg Kite. All of these were Donnie Specials.


Thanks for the stroll down memory lane. I had forgotten about some of these picks. Brrr.

You're right the Plumlee pick has a Walsh stench to it, but I'll take Bird's word he was in charge of the draft. I'm not saying Walsh wasn't leaning over Bird's back whispering in his ear what he wanted though.

BillS
06-29-2012, 10:04 AM
I'm not worried about him being a McBob clone, I'm worried about him being a Scott Haskins clone! Who btw was a Walsh pick.

My advice to the FO is re-sign Fez.

People keep bringing up Haskin but as I remember it (which, I admit, is not well because I was waaaay out of the loop at the time) Haskin was shaping up to be a very good player until his back went boom. I certainly don't recall him being reviled until he turned out to be useless physically.

able
06-29-2012, 10:04 AM
I really dont get how DW was "involved" in this pick when everyone, including Wells and LB himself are stating this is LB's draft, it starts smelling of something that goes like;"if it's a a hit, it was the brilliancy of LB, if it's a fail, it is all DW's fault because he was in the room and looked at LB".

LB's draft record is pathetic if taken all 9 years of his tenure, but we are dealing with those the same as the above, hence all the wrong picks were DW and all the good ones LB.

Btw in that list of talent during DW pls add the trade for JO, another DW, adn you forgot RM, not exactly a homerun on draft day.

Anyway Plumlee (or whatever) is ridiculous considering you have Fez to re-sign if you need/want (and i think he would be a nice way to solve your backup C) and you are still having this other 7 footer you signed lasdt year and who played 20 mins all season or close and is supposed to have a monster of an off-season so he is ready to challenge Hibbert for the starting spot soon, another enormous talent (nobody else saw) that missed more dunks than he made.

Nonetheless the guy is a Pacer with a guranteed multi million dollar contract to amaze us all.

the next Lance! (be it a bit taller)

BRushWithDeath
06-29-2012, 10:11 AM
http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg856/scaled.php?server=856&filename=larrytrolling.jpg&res=landing

aaronb
06-29-2012, 10:27 AM
By general rule around here the person responsible will depend on the outcome.

A) If Plumlee ends up being a solid NBA player. It was 100% Larry Bird's decision

or

B) If he's a bust, it was Walsh or Pritchard. Because Larry Bird is immune to making mistakes

Hicks
06-29-2012, 10:32 AM
Whether he becomes the next Jeff Foster or the next guy to only be remembered by Wikipedia, it was Bird's pick.

pacerDU
06-29-2012, 02:04 PM
Yea, old man Donnie did try and chase potential during the last part of his 24 year run with the club, however the previous 20 years with the club he was what you would call very conservative. He made one sided trades that benefited the club but those happened every few years and more often than not he tended to try and let the team grow together. I'm not saying it's a bad way of doing it but it certainly is not a swing for the fence mentality either.

Peck I understand that in this instance you're specifically responding to Cable KC's opinion of DW being a "Swing for the fences" GM, but you also reference Donnie's conservative style for most of his tenure. I know that you dislike Walsh as a GM and are none too thrilled that he's back, but I'm just curious as to what it is about his previous time here you disapprove of?

Now, all GM's will make mistakes and this includes DW. It's just the nature of the job. When you're largely speculating on talent and chemistry, it can be hit or miss. But what about that 90's decade do you disapprove of? I mean, that was undoubtably this franchises best decade since it joined the NBA. I've referenced the accomplishments of the Pacers during that decade (as well as the extremely quick and successful rebuild after the 2000 Finals) in another post. No title came, but we were extremely close. So he did assemble championship-caliber teams, it's up to the players and coaches to get it done at that point. As stated before - only 9 franchises have won a title in the last 30 years.

He drafted Reggie, Smits, your fav player of all-time Dale Davis, Antoinio Davis in the 2nd round. Made great trades for JO, Jalen Rose and Mark Jackson (we got him for Pooh Richardson if I remember correctly) and traded Vonteego Cummings for Jeff Foster. Didn't you LOVE those teams? I know I did. Another thing to consider is that he assembed those teams with only one single-digit draft pick. No easy feat.

Regardless of whether he's a "Swing for the fences" GM or "Donnie-Do-Nothing", doesn't his track-record illustrate a successful tenure? What is it about Donnie you dislike so much?

BillS
06-29-2012, 03:03 PM
Peck I understand that in this instance you're specifically responding to Cable KC's opinion of DW being a "Swing for the fences" GM, but you also reference Donnie's conservative style for most of his tenure. I know that you dislike Walsh as a GM and are none too thrilled that he's back, but I'm just curious as to what it is about his previous time here you disapprove of?

Actually, I think I can answer this having been on the other side of the argument from Peck and Doug Adams many times.

There were many years where the Pacers seemed to be one risk away from taking the final step. DW tended to tweak the roster to try to get extra oomph without taking the risk, and (as we can see from not having any rings) it didn't work. The tweaks almost never involved moves at the trade deadline or during offseason, and when they did only a few times could the moves reasonably be called "major". This is where the "Donnie Do-Nothing" epithet originates. Some (not all) in that camp point to not completely blowing up the team as a poor (and doomed to fail) attempt to rebuild without going into the lottery (an argument, I note, that still rages these many years later).

The "Walsh Warrior" argument was that the big risk has a downside out of proportion to the upside for small-market teams, and <i>we</i> point to the big risk of stockpiling talent that was unstable which was exciting and winning and yet came close to destroying the franchise. This is criticized as being both an extreme example and not as likely as we would postulate.

HOOPFANATIC
06-29-2012, 03:20 PM
I blame the overvaluing of Jeff Foster's contributions.

Sollozzo
06-29-2012, 03:42 PM
LB's draft record is pathetic if taken all 9 years of his tenure, but we are dealing with those the same as the above, hence all the wrong picks were DW and all the good ones LB.



No, it's not pathetic. It's rather solid, actually. If you're biased against him for being a Celtic then maybe you can convince yourself into believing it's pathetic, but if you look at it objectively then it's decent/average in the worst-case scenario.

For argument's sake, let's not argue about the Bird/Walsh thing and instead just assume that Bird made every draft while he was here. He was hired on July 11, 2003, meaning that his first draft pick was in 2004.

2004: David Harrison. Last pick in the first round for Christ's sake. Players taken that late rarely become anything special. Varejo and Ariza were drafted in the second round and they are about the only players taken after Harrison who amounted to anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_NBA_draft

2005: Granger. Obviously a solid pick. Don't need to elaborate much on that one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NBA_Draft

2006: Shawne Williams. Obviously we should have taken Rondo there. The Pacers, along with about 18 other teams, wish they could have that one back. Aside from Rondo though, most of the players taken after Shawne Williams were also complete crap, so it's not like a bunch of studs were taken after Shawne Williams. It was a rather thin draft by that point. Whiffing on guys like Rondo happens sometimes. Let's not forget that Donnie Walsh drafted George McLoud over Mookie Blaylock, Tim Hardaway, Dana Barros, Shawn Kemp, and BJ Armstrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NBA_Draft

2007: No draft pick because of Al Harrington. That was a poor move.

2008: Hibbert and Rush. Hibbert is an all-star and Rush was "decent". He didn't work out for us in the end, but we were able to at least trade him for a big man who helped produce off the bench.

2009: Hansbrough was decent for the first two years, though one could certainly argue that a PG would have been a better option there. But Hans hasn't been a complete bust or anything.

2010: Paul George. Very solid pick.

2011: Turned the pick into George Hill. Again, very solid move.

2012: Plumme. Obviously no way to know how it will turn out.


Now that I've gone through every draft that Bird was involved in, please explain to me how his record is "pathetic". You can say it's "average" or something like that, but "pathetic"? Come on.

pacerDU
06-29-2012, 05:16 PM
Actually, I think I can answer this having been on the other side of the argument from Peck and Doug Adams many times.

There were many years where the Pacers seemed to be one risk away from taking the final step. DW tended to tweak the roster to try to get extra oomph without taking the risk, and (as we can see from not having any rings) it didn't work. The tweaks almost never involved moves at the trade deadline or during offseason, and when they did only a few times could the moves reasonably be called "major". This is where the "Donnie Do-Nothing" epithet originates. Some (not all) in that camp point to not completely blowing up the team as a poor (and doomed to fail) attempt to rebuild without going into the lottery (an argument, I note, that still rages these many years later).

The "Walsh Warrior" argument was that the big risk has a downside out of proportion to the upside for small-market teams, and <i>we</i> point to the big risk of stockpiling talent that was unstable which was exciting and winning and yet came close to destroying the franchise. This is criticized as being both an extreme example and not as likely as we would postulate.

Thanks for that reply BillS and there are certainly good points made in your post from both sides of the argument.

I'm actually in the same camp as Peck insofar as I think DW is quite conservative, but that is one thing I like about his style. As you stated for the "Walsh Warrior" side, being a small-market team sometimes requires a different team-building method than larger markets. You're often not getting the superstar free-agent (I'm not saying you shouldn't try to get one, just saying it usually doesn't happen), so building a cohesive, well-rounded team is important. This requires patience, both to gather those players and build the required team-chemistry. Those teams during the 90's were very good, contending teams. Could a major move have been taken? Possibly, but who knows what the parameters of each possible trade or free-agent signing were. As it stood the team was very good and, I feel, only needed small adjustments.

Now it was true that Barkley wanted to play for us. But again who knows what the requirements would've been to get him. Would we have to give up say Reggie and one of the Davis' to do it? If that was the case, to me it wouldn't be worth it. I doubt Donnie just said "ef it, who needs Charles Barkley".

He made the trade of Antonio Davis for Jonathan Bender. That was a risky move that unfortunately didn't pay off. That move may have cost us a championship too as Dale Davis was the only guy we had to guard Shaq and there were a couple of games where if we get 1 more key rebound or defensive stop, we win the game. Big risks don't always pay off which is why when you're as close as we were, you need to be careful with your moves.

Just because we didn't actually win a title, doesn't mean Donnie failed. All you can do is field the best team possible. There are no guaranteed titles. Those great Utah teams with Stockton and Malone never won but I wouldn't call their GM a failure. There were some great Suns teams around the same time that didn't get one, same with the Knicks.

Now I know people aren't necessarily calling DW a failure, but with some of the reaction to his re-hiring on here, you'd think we'd just brought in Isiah Thomas.

Reginald
06-29-2012, 05:25 PM
So many felt the Pacers win Heat series with a healthy Foster...

When was this EVER raised as a legitimate reason we didn't beat the Heat? If you asked me to list 10 reasons we lost to Miami, Reason 1A was the lack of an above-the-rim athlete who could create his own shot, Reason 1B was the lack of ANYBODY who could throw an entry pass to Roy on the block. But lack of a healthy Jeff Foster? I'd put that somewhere around reason #12.

Naptown_Seth
06-29-2012, 08:58 PM
GOOO PLUMLEEE . C'Mon give the dude a chance. Even if he turns out to be a McBob clone, that won't be a bad thing.
Yes, all he has to do is develop good handles for a big, solid offensive awareness, a nasty vert with a knack for backdoor alley-oops and shot blocking and he'll almost be a Josh clone.

Just think, you don't let Josh and Rush go and you don't need Lou and Barbosa or now Plumlee. Keep the guys that knew the team and the system and let them show what they can do for Vogel's system. So pointless, a big bunch of handwaving to end up right where you started except slightly worse.

Bench 40% 3, takes 4-5 shots a game, 5 boards, some solid bench defense. Bench 4 shots, 2 highlight dunks, 6 boards, 1-2 blocks, some solid shot screens and picks, quick enough to defend SFs on switches. Yes, we don't need that at all.



(my theory - Rush and Josh hindered the growth/use of Tyler and Lance and had to be removed as options for Vogel)



Anyway, for the thread - all calls were and will be Larry. Yes, even the good stuff like signing West and drafting Roy or fair stuff like Hill for Leonard. DW keeps Larry's seat warm.

Naptown_Seth
06-29-2012, 09:13 PM
However I am willing to admit this sounds like Bird did this but I can't help but thinking that Walsh was sitting over in the corner smoking a cig. drinking a diet coke and cackling like Dr. Strangelove.
...said Jonathan Bender. I mean because trading a key, fan fav PF still headed to a future AS game for the #5 pick and spending it on a gifted, rail thin HS player is all about the "safe" and "do nothing" and "Haskin/Gray". And making it 2 HS players in a row (Harrington) only emphasizes just how scared s***less Donnie was to do anything or take any risks.


Peck, DW has made mistakes, just like Bird. My problem isn't that he can't be criticized but that a guy who literally assembled the best winning run of any NBA team during one decade stretch, other than the actual titles (ie, most CF appearances) gets ripped for doing nothing and being terrible at his job.

Herb for Detlef, Detlef who then played as a Pacers all-star and was back to back 6th man. And yet right after his 2nd 6th man award DW gives Larry Brown his wish and trades him for Derrick McKey and his defense. Yes, that in no way involves risk.


Good lord - it takes balls of steel to trade away Detlef and Antonio when he did. Wait, what's that? Oh yeah, I forgot he ALSO TRADED THE RIFLEMAN while he was still a major Pacers star. And Dale when he still had an all-star game in him. Oh, and Jackson while he was in his assists prime (went to Denver and started throwing around 11-12 dimes a night).

THE ONLY PACERS STARS DONNIE DIDN'T TRADE WERE REGGIE AND RIK. Not kinda, this is the truth. Chuck, Detlef, Jax, Antonio, Dale....wait, and Rose. So basically Donnie was a do-nothing because he stupidly insisted on hanging on to Reggie and Rik. Because he traded the rest of the big names/money.





I do think Donnie and Larry are about even on drafting, a mix of later pick homeruns and weird infatuation misses. Hans is Larry's McCloud, Granger and Roy are Larry's Dale and Antonio and Reggie (they were better but also higher picks, in all cases more bang for the pick buck, although Antonio is clearly the best value Pacers pick ever).

Major Cold
06-29-2012, 09:19 PM
Vogel said in the video after the pick tat it was Bird's pick all the way. No confusion there.