Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

  1. #1
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,042

    Default Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...S0404/51007007

    Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A
    Indianapolis Star sports reporter Mike Wells answers your questions about the Pacers.

    Answers Posted Dec. 3, 2005

    Question: If Jonathon Bender decides to retire, will he still count against the Pacers salary cap in this and future seasons?

    Answer: If Bender is forced to retire, which would be very unfortunate, he will still get paid because his contract is guaranteed. If an independent doctor determines Bender can no longer play, the Pacers will apply to the league to have what's left of his contract removed for salary cap purposes one year from the date it was determined he couldn't play anymore. The move will also help for luxury tax purposes. (Johnny from Chico, Calif.)


    Question: I agree with you that the return of Jeff Foster will be huge. My question is what about the other centers on the roster. We are getting killed on the boards and the centers don't even play a combined 20 minutes in a game. Even when Pollard starts he seldom plays more than 15 minutes. If they can't rebound then why are they on the roster? (Tom from Muncie. Ind.)

    Answer: I agree with you Tom on your comment about the centers not being able to play a combined 20 minutes a game and help rebound the ball. David Harrison can't stay on the court long enough to contribute because he usually picks up a couple of fouls within 30 seconds of checking into game. Harrison needs to learn to quit getting offensive fouls and to stay on his feet because the slightest pump fake sends him jumping toward the roof. Pollard is a situational center. He won't play unless the Pacers are going against somebody like Shaq or Yao Ming. Depending on how quickly Foster returns to his former self, the Pacers could end up trying to trade Pollard later this season because he's in the final of his contract. O'Neal and Croshere, the team's top rebounders, need Foster to get back into game shape quickly because you're right, the Pacers are getting outrebounded on the glass and it really showed in the Atlanta game when they gave up 24 offensive rebounds to the Hawks.


    Question: Is there anyone that thinks the Pacers struggles are a result of Rick Carlisle? Everyone talks about how he is a great coach, and how he held the team together last year, but do you really think his style fits the Pacers? It seems like they are most suited to be a uptempo team and he is all about slowing them down and calling a play. What do you think? (Brian from Fort Wayne, Ind.)

    Answer: There's no other way to put it: Carlisle is a micromanager when it comes to coaching. The Pacers had one of their best games against New Jersey when Carlisle wasn't constantly calling a play every time the court. Anthony Johnson said it best after that game when he said Carlisle "trusts himself more than he trusts us." This team has the players to play uptempo (except against Phoenix). The constant play calling disrupts the flow of the game. The ball usually ends up in O'Neal's hands in the post with everybody standing around watching after the initial first cut to the basket by the passer. Playing that style makes the Pacers predictable on offense. The things is, though, that style has allowed Carlisle to be successful as a coach so far. So I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't change his style.


    Question: I'm one of the few Austin Croshere supporters. I've been saying for years that he is underappreciated and that when he is on the floor the team seems to play better. This perception was supported by an analysis published in the Star a season or two ago. I believe that he is getting more of an opportunity to play this season, and that he is playing well. My question is why was Croshere taken out near the end of the Atlanta game. I believe that he would have rebounded the missed free throw, and that the Pacers would have won the game. In fact, it seems like most of the Pacer losses so far this season have been because Croshere was not on the floor near the end of the game. (Kevin from Indianapolis)

    Answer: Croshere's usually not on the court at the end of games for defensive purposes. As good of a rebounder and free throw shooter as he is, Croshere isn't quick enough on defense. You're taking a risk by having him on the court at the end of a close game because you'll probably have to give help, which will leave somebody else open on the court. Despite his defensive problems, Croshere has been one of the Pacers' bright spots this season.


    Question: Is Stephan Jackson a plus or a minus for the Pacers in all respects?
    (Jack from Bloomingdale, Ill.)

    Answer: My problem with Jackson is that you never know which player is going to show up. Some nights he looks like a player that fits in well alongside Jermaine and Artest. Other nights he looks like he's the one hurting the team chemistry (the Nov. 25 game against Atlanta) and he's more worried about improving his individual stats than playing within the team concept. He has a tendency to take bad shots in the offense. I think part of that problem is the loss of Mike Brown to Cleveland. Brown had the ability to relate with the players and keep their head in the game. Brown would often go to the end of the bench and talk to Jackson to keep him focused when he would get upset over an issue.

  2. #2
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,369

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Didn't someone here bring up the Mike Brown / SJax comment that Wells just pointed out about how Brown was able to speak to and keep SJax focused last season?
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  3. #3
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,929

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    So there are people who think you could turn this team loose and they'd be fine?

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  4. #4
    Tree People to the Core! indygeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cumberland
    Posts
    15,214
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Hmm I wonder if Mike Wells might just be a bit too candid for some people.
    If you get to thinkiní youíre a person of some influence, try orderiní somebody elseís dog around..

  5. #5

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by indygeezer
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hmm I wonder if Mike Wells might just be a bit too candid for some people.
    Does make you wonder. I imagine he'll be a short timer as he'll likely be able to cash in with a larger market within several years.

  6. #6
    flexible and robust SoupIsGood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lappy Go Hucky
    Age
    26
    Posts
    17,540

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Wells isn't candid as much as he is an unbiased parrot. I really wonder if he even watches the games. His answers are amazingly superficial.
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

  7. #7
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,692

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    There is a BIG difference between "telling it as it is" and "blowing it out your ear"

    IMO Wells is mostly doing the latter, for one he does not care one iota about facts and for two, even in his opinionated answers he uses what he reads on bulletin boards to underwrite his opinion, but let's tackle this one:

    Quote Originally Posted by Will Galen
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A

    Question: If Jonathon Bender decides to retire, will he still count against the Pacers salary cap in this and future seasons?

    Answer: If Bender is forced to retire, which would be very unfortunate, he will still get paid because his contract is guaranteed. If an independent doctor determines Bender can no longer play, the Pacers will apply to the league to have what's left of his contract removed for salary cap purposes one year from the date it was determined he couldn't play anymore. The move will also help for luxury tax purposes. (Johnny from Chico, Calif.)
    OK I can see it's hard to "know" anything about the CBA, but this one is A more complicated and B plain wrong.
    The application can only be done if a player has played less then 7 games over the past 12 months and will then be (IF given) valid straight away, not one year from then, getting your facts straight seems unimportant here, readin Coon's is obviously to much work for the salart they are paying him.

    Question: I agree with you that the return of Jeff Foster will be huge. My question is what about the other centers on the roster. We are getting killed on the boards and the centers don't even play a combined 20 minutes in a game. Even when Pollard starts he seldom plays more than 15 minutes. If they can't rebound then why are they on the roster? (Tom from Muncie. Ind.)

    Answer: I agree with you Tom on your comment about the centers not being able to play a combined 20 minutes a game and help rebound the ball. David Harrison can't stay on the court long enough to contribute because he usually picks up a couple of fouls within 30 seconds of checking into game. Harrison needs to learn to quit getting offensive fouls and to stay on his feet because the slightest pump fake sends him jumping toward the roof. Pollard is a situational center. He won't play unless the Pacers are going against somebody like Shaq or Yao Ming. Depending on how quickly Foster returns to his former self, the Pacers could end up trying to trade Pollard later this season because he's in the final of his contract. O'Neal and Croshere, the team's top rebounders, need Foster to get back into game shape quickly because you're right, the Pacers are getting outrebounded on the glass and it really showed in the Atlanta game when they gave up 24 offensive rebounds to the Hawks.
    First of all, our "centers" have notoriously not been rebounding machines, excemption for Jeff, Smits was definitely not the best rebounder in the world, but we have guys like JO and Cro and Artest and we have G's that do some rebounding, in general the Pacers used to be a very decent rebounding team, the type of coaching/defense does not help here either, but I highlighted something else; Here (on Hulk) he is simply proving to be to lazy to do a 10 minute job to get his facts straight, let me prove my concept here :

    According to Mr Wells Hulk picks up 5 founs in 30 seconds and does not rebound, so I went to pacers.com and went over the games we played this season to find something I knew was there; david did not foul out this year (reg season) in fact:

    against Magic: 10 min 2 rb 1 pf 6 pts
    aginst Heat(1) 11 min 3 r b5 pf 4 pts
    against 76rs 2 min 0 rb 0 pf 0 pts
    against Heat(2) 12 min 1 rb 4 pf 5 pts
    against nets IL
    against Bucks IL
    against Bobcats 14 min 3 rb 2 pf 5 pts
    against Bobcats 15 min 4 reb 3 pf 1 pts
    against Rockets 12 min 3 rb 4 pf 2 pts
    against Cavs 12 min 3 rb 3 pf 2 pts
    against Hawks 6 min 2 rb 1 pf 0 pts
    against Clippers 11 min 6 reb 2 pf 2 pts
    against Jazz 13 min 6 reb 1 pf 4 pts
    against Suns 11 min 3 reb 2 pf 8 pts

    I can not be so difficult to do this before you drop something that was not even asked.

    Question: Is there anyone that thinks the Pacers struggles are a result of Rick Carlisle? Everyone talks about how he is a great coach, and how he held the team together last year, but do you really think his style fits the Pacers? It seems like they are most suited to be a uptempo team and he is all about slowing them down and calling a play. What do you think? (Brian from Fort Wayne, Ind.)

    Answer: There's no other way to put it: Carlisle is a micromanager when it comes to coaching. The Pacers had one of their best games against New Jersey when Carlisle wasn't constantly calling a play every time the court. Anthony Johnson said it best after that game when he said Carlisle "trusts himself more than he trusts us." This team has the players to play uptempo (except against Phoenix). The constant play calling disrupts the flow of the game. The ball usually ends up in O'Neal's hands in the post with everybody standing around watching after the initial first cut to the basket by the passer. Playing that style makes the Pacers predictable on offense. The things is, though, that style has allowed Carlisle to be successful as a coach so far. So I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't change his style.
    As the question asked an opinion it got one, you either agree or you dont, not "facts" to be lost here.
    Question: I'm one of the few Austin Croshere supporters. I've been saying for years that he is underappreciated and that when he is on the floor the team seems to play better. This perception was supported by an analysis published in the Star a season or two ago. I believe that he is getting more of an opportunity to play this season, and that he is playing well. My question is why was Croshere taken out near the end of the Atlanta game. I believe that he would have rebounded the missed free throw, and that the Pacers would have won the game. In fact, it seems like most of the Pacer losses so far this season have been because Croshere was not on the floor near the end of the game. (Kevin from Indianapolis)

    Answer: Croshere's usually not on the court at the end of games for defensive purposes. As good of a rebounder and free throw shooter as he is, Croshere isn't quick enough on defense. You're taking a risk by having him on the court at the end of a close game because you'll probably have to give help, which will leave somebody else open on the court. Despite his defensive problems, Croshere has been one of the Pacers' bright spots this season.
    This could've easily been tied in with the question above, burt again it is an opinion, not facts.

    Question: Is Stephan Jackson a plus or a minus for the Pacers in all respects?
    (Jack from Bloomingdale, Ill.)

    Answer: My problem with Jackson is that you never know which player is going to show up. Some nights he looks like a player that fits in well alongside Jermaine and Artest. Other nights he looks like he's the one hurting the team chemistry (the Nov. 25 game against Atlanta) and he's more worried about improving his individual stats than playing within the team concept. He has a tendency to take bad shots in the offense. I think part of that problem is the loss of Mike Brown to Cleveland. Brown had the ability to relate with the players and keep their head in the game. Brown would often go to the end of the bench and talk to Jackson to keep him focused when he would get upset over an issue.
    This answer defies an answer, he simplu doesn't answer the question, given the opportunity to give an opinion on something perhaps slightly controversial, he goes to an answer that any secretary could've typed out.

    In short, I think he is a serious downgrade over MM, no matter what.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  8. #8
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    You guys take what he says way too seriously. He's giving his opinion.

  9. #9
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,528

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    I much prefer Wells to Montieth.

  10. #10
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,042

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    I agree with Able. Wells answers questions that most of the regulars on here could answer better. Montieth was a homer, but I like that. I like keeping the dirt away from the public. I don't think beat writers should lie for the team though.

  11. #11
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,063

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Are you guys kidding? Wells is way better than MM. I don't care so much if he's always right. At least he's willing to make some critical comments.

    IMO, the following several statements in this article by Wells would never have been provided by Montieth:

    "Harrison needs to learn to quit getting offensive fouls and to stay on his feet because the slightest pump fake sends him jumping toward the roof.

    "Carlisle is a micromanager when it comes to coaching.

    "The constant play calling disrupts the flow of the game.

    "Other nights [Jax} looks like he's the one hurting the team chemistry (the Nov. 25 game against Atlanta)

    "he's more worried about improving his individual stats than playing within the team concept.

    "He has a tendency to take bad shots in the offense.

  12. #12
    flexible and robust SoupIsGood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lappy Go Hucky
    Age
    26
    Posts
    17,540

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    What's the point of his being critical if there is no substance?
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

  13. #13
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,692

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    being critical is ok, stating incorrect matters is plain stupid, certainly if you make a living writing.

    He does the first based on the latter, which makes him a bad writer/journalist.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  14. #14
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,528

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by Will Galen
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with Able. Wells answers questions that most of the regulars on here could answer better. Montieth was a homer, but I like that. I like keeping the dirt away from the public. I don't think beat writers should lie for the team though.
    And if I were reading Pacers.com I would agree with you 100%. In fact if I were Walsh I would be p!ssed if ever a negative word were uttered on that site.

    However since I'm supposed to be reading a local newspaper that is for the most part supposed to be neutral then no, I don't think I want cheerleading from a Q & A session.

    Now Able is dead on that he has to try & match his opinions with the facts on hand but it's up to the writer to maintain some form of neutrality.

    BTW, for the record I don't think he should just bash the team either. I just want it called straight down the middle.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by able
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    OK I can see it's hard to "know" anything about the CBA, but this one is A more complicated and B plain wrong.
    The application can only be done if a player has played less then 7 games over the past 12 months and will then be (IF given) valid straight away, not one year from then, getting your facts straight seems unimportant here, readin Coon's is obviously to much work for the salart they are paying him.
    ???

    From: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#53

    There is one exception whereby a player can continue to receive his salary, but the salary is not included in the team's team salary. This is when a player is forced to retire for medical reasons and a league-appointed physician confirms that he is medically unfit to continue playing. There is a waiting period of one year following the injury or illness before a team can apply for this salary cap relief. If the waiting period expires mid-season (on any date prior to the last day of the regular season), then the player's entire salary for that season is removed from the team's team salary. For example, in March 2003 the Knicks were allowed to remove Luc Longley's entire 2002-03 salary from their books (and since the luxury tax is based on the team salary as of the last day of the regular season, the Knicks avoided paying any tax on Longley's salary). This provision can also be used when a player dies while under contract.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  16. #16
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,692

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by DisplacedKnick
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ???

    From: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#53

    There is one exception whereby a player can continue to receive his salary, but the salary is not included in the team's team salary. This is when a player is forced to retire for medical reasons and a league-appointed physician confirms that he is medically unfit to continue playing. There is a waiting period of one year following the injury or illness before a team can apply for this salary cap relief. If the waiting period expires mid-season (on any date prior to the last day of the regular season), then the player's entire salary for that season is removed from the team's team salary. For example, in March 2003 the Knicks were allowed to remove Luc Longley's entire 2002-03 salary from their books (and since the luxury tax is based on the team salary as of the last day of the regular season, the Knicks avoided paying any tax on Longley's salary). This provision can also be used when a player dies while under contract.

    Which is exactly what I am saying, You can apply after a year and get is THEN he suggest that they apply now and have to wait a year AFTER the application.

    If an independent doctor determines Bender can no longer play, the Pacers will apply to the league to have what's left of his contract removed for salary cap purposes one year from the date it was determined he couldn't play anymore.
    This is incorrect, after the independent check, they go back 12 months, where there are less then 7 games played.

    And the 7 games comes from the CBA itself. though they have a restrition as well, but they are mainly meant to see "if you can get him back on the court" or "determine he can play with full and needed capabilities".

    In other (perhaps more clear) words: He states they apply now and get next year, the CBA states, wait a year then apply and get, so IF we get the excemption he will not count against the cap & LT this year(season) whereas Dumbo is stating that it would be next year we had relief.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  17. #17

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by able
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And the 7 games comes from the CBA itself. though they have a restrition as well, but they are mainly meant to see "if you can get him back on the court" or "determine he can play with full and needed capabilities".

    In other (perhaps more clear) words: He states they apply now and get next year, the CBA states, wait a year then apply and get, so IF we get the excemption he will not count against the cap & LT this year(season) whereas Dumbo is stating that it would be next year we had relief.
    Maybe you gave a link to the source for this 7 games mention and I missed it, so could you link the source again. Much appreciated.

  18. #18
    Member naptownmenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    4,620

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by able
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Which is exactly what I am saying, You can apply after a year and get is THEN he suggest that they apply now and have to wait a year AFTER the application.



    This is incorrect, after the independent check, they go back 12 months, where there are less then 7 games played.

    And the 7 games comes from the CBA itself. though they have a restrition as well, but they are mainly meant to see "if you can get him back on the court" or "determine he can play with full and needed capabilities".
    Where is this in the current CBA? I think that is an old provision in the previous CBA but not the current one. In otherwords, I think Wells has it right.

    BTW, I like Wells candid approach much better than Montieth's sugar-coating.
    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Larry is not coming back, he didn't have a meeting with Orlando for not reason, yeah he is coming back to the NBA but not to the Pacers, the notion that he is a taking a year off and then come back is absurd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    GOOD GOD THAT'S LARRY BIRD'S MUSIC!

  19. #19
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,692

    Default Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Quote Originally Posted by naptownmenace
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Where is this in the current CBA? I think that is an old provision in the previous CBA but not the current one. In otherwords, I think Wells has it right.

    BTW, I like Wells candid approach much better than Montieth's sugar-coating.
    The current CBA is in part on the same site the old CBA was, the players union site, but it is still dripped in, instead of one go, my guess is that the are a little understaffed.

    The 7 days was in the old, and has to my knowledge also based upon several publications in the press, among which NBA.COM shortly before and after the new CBA was born, not been changed, the only thing changed is that it went from 2 to 1 year.
    The 7 games are also "logic" if you see that otherwise no team would try and bring a "doubtfull" player back, as it would be to costly a risk, no owner would want that removed and players do also not gain by removing it.

    Perhaps I am not clear in stating why Wells is wrong, but once more, they way Wells states it the Pacers wil have Bender on the cap for this year even IF we are gratned the excemption, which is NOT the case, one can apply AFTER a year to GET it NOW instead of applying NOW to get it in a YEAR from now.

    Wells is clearly implying the latter which is wrong.

    And yes, candid is good, critic is good, facts wrong is bad, see above and my proof in the Harrisson remarks, which are nonsensical if you realise that David has not fouled out once this season.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •