Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

    March 26, 2007

    bob kravitz

    Carlisle deserves better, but he likely will take fall for this mess

    At some point, it comes back to the coach. That's the way it is in the NBA, more than any other professional sports league, and that's the way it's going to go with Rick Carlisle, whose Indiana Pacers lost again Sunday and are perilously close to performing a task thought darned near impossible: Missing the playoffs in the Eastern Conference.

    When this season ends -- and that's the good news; it will end soon enough -- it's better than even money that Carlisle will take the fall, be the scapegoat for what has been more than three years of front-office foolishness and missteps.

    What? They're going to give CEO Donnie Walsh a gold watch and tell him thanks for the memories? He has a lifetime pass in this organization.

    What? They're going to fire team president Larry Bird, just at the moment he seems poised to take over this franchise? This is Indiana. You don't fire Larry Legend.

    No, it won't be the guys in the front office, who, if you're asking me, should bear the overwhelming brunt of the criticism for what has happened to this franchise over the past four years. Guaranteed, it will be Carlisle, who, while he's not beyond culpability, is not central to this team's precipitous decline.
    Take a look at that team right now, with Jamaal Tinsley going through the motions at the point, with Danny Granger looking lost as ever, with Darrell Armstrong, a 38-year-old, playing with more emotion and energy than anybody else on the roster, and tell me how Red Auerbach, Phil Jackson and Pat Riley could summon greatness from that collection of humanity.

    But when the team is on the verge of missing the playoffs in the East -- in the East! -- and home attendance is the third worst in the entire NBA, the franchise has to sell a different program. And unless they're willing to do the right thing -- that is, bite the bullet, deal Jermaine O'Neal and start over -- the only change they can hope to sell is in the coach's office.
    What options do they have?

    In this season's big trade, they brought in two guys, Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy, who have longer-term contracts than the players they dealt.
    And then there was the regrettably misguided idea of re-signing Tinsley to a long-term deal. Even if you're willing to assume Tinsley is innocent of the charges that have been brought against him, you have to be disgusted by his attitude and performance. Tinsley with a long-term guarantee is like giving a drunk the key to the liquor cabinet.

    Yes, he has stayed healthier this season than ever before, but consider: In the middle of a long losing streak, he got himself suspended for repeated bouts of tardiness. With his team playing the second game of a back-to-back in San Antonio, Tinsley chucked the ball into the stands and got ejected. Then Sunday against the Chicago Bulls, he was up to his old tricks again. Just as the Pacers had gone on a 7-0 run to take a 48-40 lead, Tinsley committed his third foul of the game, then got a technical for yapping at the official. The Bulls then scored five straight points.

    Read my lips: They will never win with that guy. Ever. He has actually devolved since that promising rookie season. And without a decent backup like, say, Anthony Johnson, he knows he will never be held fully responsible for his missteps.

    Again, Carlisle is not above blame here. He has been inconsistent in his treatment of players. He has been too soft on some, too hard on others. His micromanaging style of calling most of the plays has left players, most of them gone by now, frustrated and feeling stifled by a lack of creative freedom.

    But.

    His first year, with a full, productive and mostly sane team, he won 61 games and reached the Eastern Conference finals.
    His second year, there was The Brawl, after which Carlisle did the best coaching job of his career.

    His third year began with Ron Artest asking for a trade, turned into a waiting game with Artest waiting to be dealt, and ended with the team even more dysfunctional than when it started.

    This year? They made the big trade for Al Harrington in the offseason. They had the Club Rio incident. They had the 8 Seconds Saloon incident. They had a second seismic deal, giving up on the Baby Al experiment after just 36 games, which seemed way too soon. And that doesn't even mention the usual injury problems, notably the ones afflicting O'Neal and Marquis Daniels.
    Let's face it: Carlisle has been forced to deal with three first-ballot candidates for the Knucklehead Hall of Fame. Artest has his own wing, as you know. Stephen Jackson? Temperamental is a kind word. Tinsley? Don't get me started . . . again.

    For those of you who are convinced Carlisle is the reason the Pacers are headed toward their worst season since 1988-89, tell me, whom would you recommend as Carlisle's successor?

    If Carlisle gets dumped, I have a perfect candidate.

    Yes.

    Larry Bird.

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...90/1004/SPORTS
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "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, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

    Kravtiz loves to gripe about everything, but this may be the most accurate article he has ever written, except for the last two words.

    I don't understand how he can argue that Bird and Walsh are actually the most to blame, earlier in the article, and then say that Bird needs an expanded role. That is just

    other than the ending, he seems to have hit a bullseye.

    I'm not sure what two words he should have ended it with. Somebody as an interim who takes no crap from players. Would Mark Jackson be tough enough?
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

      Originally posted by pacertom View Post
      Kravtiz loves to gripe about everything, but this may be the most accurate article he has ever written, except for the last two words.

      I don't understand how he can argue that Bird and Walsh are actually the most to blame, earlier in the article, and then say that Bird needs an expanded role. That is just
      I think he's sarcastically saying that Larry Bird should have to coach them as punishment for being part of a management team that put that collection on the floor.

      -Bball
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "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, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

        I find that it takes less and less time to read his columns on the Pacers, because they are basically the same one, over and over.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

          I agree with him on Carlisle, at least.

          Having Larry coach the team with Mark Jackson as an assistant is not a half-bad idea.
          The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
          http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
          RSS Feed
          Subscribe via iTunes

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

            All I've ever heard - both from Larry himself and those "close to the situation" is that Larry HATED coaching and will never EVER go back.

            Yeah, I know. "Never say 'never.'" But I don't think it's wise to bring up the name when there is so little possibility of it happening.

            On the subject of Mark Jackson, let me ask this: would Jax be a "player's coach"? Will he inspire our young talent to greatness?
            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

              Originally posted by Bball View Post




              But when the team is on the verge of missing the playoffs in the East -- in the East! -- and home attendance is the third worst in the entire NBA, the franchise has to sell a different program. And unless they're willing to do the right thing -- that is, bite the bullet, deal Jermaine O'Neal and start over -- the only change they can hope to sell is in the coach's office.
              What options do they have?

              That is sort of what I said at the forum party.


              I also find this part of Kravitz column, interesting.

              Tinsley with a long-term guarantee is like giving a drunk the key to the liquor cabinet


              I find it strange that Kravitz used drunk and Tinsley in the same sentence.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                Good column, I completely agree. I think Bball was spot on btw with what Kravitz wrote with regards to putting Larry Bird in the coaches seat.
                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                  I think if Rick goes Larry should follow him.
                  No matter how much success Larry Bird attains in Indiana he'll never top that first command to fire Thomas. -Peter Vecsey. NY Post 12/4/07

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                    Originally posted by Kravitz
                    But when the team is on the verge of missing the playoffs in the East -- in the East! -- and home attendance is the third worst in the entire NBA, the franchise has to sell a different program. And unless they're willing to do the right thing -- that is, bite the bullet, deal Jermaine O'Neal and start over -- the only change they can hope to sell is in the coach's office.
                    What options do they have?
                    Who made him an expert about the NBA?

                    When he says, "bite the bullet"...Is he talking about taking another hit on talent just to unload a player that he doesn't like? If you get fair value in a trade...then there is no bullet to bite.

                    The most disturbing thing about Kravitz commenting on the Pacers is not his negativity, but his true lack of knowledge and interest in the NBA. Yet, he expects us to take his advice or opinions as if he is "the authority".

                    Granted, I do agree with a lot of what he is saying about management needing to fall on the sword, but this is fairly obvious to most anyone that follows the team with anymore then a casual interest. No Kudos for Bobby!!

                    Lets be honest...there is a reason coaches fall on the sword before managment or the players in sports.
                    ...Still "flying casual"
                    @roaminggnome74

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                      Clearly the front office needs to take some of the blame but a lot of the blame they need to take was hiring a slow it down control freak to run a young athletic team. Once that did not work they should have fired Rick rather than trade talented players for inconsistent players with huge long term deals. They should have brought in a coach who could work with players like Al, Jack, Jermaine and Jamaal.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                        I don't think Rick wants to be a slow it down control freak. OK maybe just a control freak, but I think our core is a turnover waiting to happen when the reigns are loose, and then they also stop playing defense. They need it the way it is, as much as that sucks.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          I think he's sarcastically saying that Larry Bird should have to coach them as punishment for being part of a management team that put that collection on the floor.

                          -Bball
                          ala Isiah Thomas.

                          Originally posted by Mal View Post
                          I don't think Rick wants to be a slow it down control freak. OK maybe just a control freak, but I think our core is a turnover waiting to happen when the reigns are loose, and then they also stop playing defense. They need it the way it is, as much as that sucks.
                          Also there was a series of play from late in the 3rd to a few minutes into the 4th when they seemed to not be running full plays and instead were trying to create offense on their own, mostly off dribble penetration or basic PnRs with no motion elsewhere.

                          Now isn't it odd that all game they are running sets, and suddenly for a few minutes they stop? I think this was him letting loose of the reigns for awhile and it showed just how coordinated and free-flowing that style is. How could anyone expect non-sets to look more up-tempo? Unless the same players have been together for years how could they possible hope to run screens and picks for each other to set up a guy 10 seconds and 4 screen/picks later? You don't.

                          Playground ball is 1 or 2 guys at most doing a play that's about as deep as 2-3 sections, ie, PnR 1) set pick 2) go around pick 3) pass back to pick now rolling to the rim...and even then a guy might FADE for the jumper instead of rolling to the rim and the pass is a turnover instead.

                          What happened in the game yesterday was that you had a kickout pass or a rotation pass, a mild attempt to find JO in the post (which they never could), tons of standing around trying to figure out how to make something of this or what to do if you don't have the ball, and zero flow.


                          PLAYS MAKE GAMES FLOW, not free-for-alls. The only time free-for-alls look uptempo is one both teams are missing and scrambling around for the ball. If one team is putting it in and forcing you to freelance from the halfcourt then you are dead in the water.

                          Now running off turnovers, well they've been trying to do that all year, RC never slows that down. That's where full court bomb passes come from and Granger charges (yesterday) too.

                          I will make room to suggest that maybe Rick was calling lots of iso dribble penetration rather than curls and screens (including screens for post guys), but he didn't before that point and ended it around 8 minutes left in the 4th. All I know is the offense screeched to a halt, and point production followed right behind.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                            Originally posted by Kravitz

                            Yes, he has stayed healthier this season than ever before, but consider: In the middle of a long losing streak, he got himself suspended for repeated bouts of tardiness. With his team playing the second game of a back-to-back in San Antonio, Tinsley chucked the ball into the stands and got ejected. Then Sunday against the Chicago Bulls, he was up to his old tricks again. Just as the Pacers had gone on a 7-0 run to take a 48-40 lead, Tinsley committed his third foul of the game, then got a technical for yapping at the official. The Bulls then scored five straight points.

                            Read my lips: They will never win with that guy. Ever. He has actually devolved since that promising rookie season. And without a decent backup like, say, Anthony Johnson, he knows he will never be held fully responsible for his missteps.
                            Man, I hate to pile on and agree with BK to this extent, but I just loved that description of JT. Particularly the bolded part. Exactly sums up how I feel.

                            Say all you want about DA's weaknesses. And yes there are plenty! But I say he's our best PG option precisely b/c of this. From that position he motivates other guys to play hard. He sets an example and provides leadership.

                            Tins is definitely the superior TALENT but he isn't dependable to play to his talent level consistently and he doesn't provide any of the motivation/leadership.
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz: Carlisle Deserves Better, But....

                              I don't see how Larry should be the one punished for putting the team on the floor when it's been said time and time again that Walsh is the one that's made all the moves. We gonna have Walsh coach the team?

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X