Well, he came right out and said it!
---------
O'Brien must go -- for the good of the bad Pacers
Posted: March 7, 2010
http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...the-bad-Pacers
Maybe Jim O'Brien is trying to get himself fired. Maybe he's gone in the tank, just as his team has done for the past few months, and is willing to take the cash for next season and move on back to Florida.
I've written it before, with a mild bit of hesitation.
I'm writing it now, with no hesitation, with major emphasis, with boldfaced capital letters.
O'BRIEN HAS GOT TO GO
We can all agree, this season was stillborn before it got past the first two weeks. Even in that home opener, they played with no energy, no passion, no clue. And it hasn't gotten any better all season.
Maybe that says more about this current group of players than it does about O'Brien, but you can't fire the players.
Ultimately, they're not performing for this guy. They've checked out, zoned out, quit hearing his voice. If it was just a matter of losing, fine, but they're losing badly, losing by double digits, getting outworked on a regular basis.
This team came into the season with the most minimal of expectations. Win three or four more games than last year, end up with 40 total and maybe sneak into the playoffs in the top-heavy Eastern Conference. Instead, they've regressed. Dramatically.
Defensively, they are generally as bad as they were last season, with some statistics slightly better and others slightly worse.
Offensively, though, they've had their greatest decline. This used to be a fun team to watch: competitive, fluid. This year, a still life, 18th in the league in scoring.
I was absolutely floored when I read O'Brien's recent quote in which he suggested the reason the offense was stagnant was because he didn't have Jeff Foster distributing the ball out of the high post.
What? Your offense was built around a guy who never should have been given an extension and has been falling apart the past three years? Excuse me?
And while it's ultimately a good thing that they're assured of a top-five draft choice, the question is, do you really want O'Brien coaching that new player?
I know it would be a cosmetic move, but let O'Brien go now and do one of two things: Either bring Larry Bird down on an interim basis, or give Lester Conner a two-month-long shot. Do something with these final 19 games.
I want to see if Roy Hibbert can be more consistent when given more consistent minutes, when the coach isn't fiddling around matching up with the opponents' big men.
I want to see if someone else can find the light switch in Brandon Rush's head -- assuming there is a light switch, a questionable proposition at best.
I want to see A.J. Price play significant minutes in place of Earl Watson. O'Brien likes to say that he saw all he needed to see when Price played well during a month stretch earlier in the season. So why not continue to develop him and reward his good play during the season? What purpose is served by giving his minutes to Watson, who won't be here next year?
I want to see if the next guy -- Bird, Conner, whoever -- can bring T.J. Ford back to life. Like it or not, you're stuck with
Ford next season, so you might as well get some productivity out of him. Next year, he'll be in the final year of his deal, so that's a good thing, too. It's not all O'Brien's fault, but the bottom line is, he's run off two point guards in his time here, Jamaal Tinsley and Ford.
I mistakenly believed that by giving O'Brien an extension through next season, the players would not treat their coach like a lame duck.
I was wrong. Wrong about that, wrong about the Pacers making the playoffs -- well, not just wrong, but monumentally wrong.
For me, and for the fans who still pay attention to the Pacers, the tipping point came earlier this week after Josh McRoberts' inspired performance against the Los Angeles Lakers. O'Brien was lobbed a softball question about McRoberts, given a chance to laud a guy who rarely gets off the bench, and he slammed him by saying his performance was "irrelevant.'' He then said he wanted to see McRoberts do that in a winning effort, except McRoberts never gets to play when the game is on the line. For his good work against L.A., McRoberts was rewarded with five minutes of garbage time in Portland.
Here was an easy chance to say, "If everybody played with that kind of passion when the game was on the line, we might not be stuck at 20 stinking wins.'' Instead, he threw McRoberts under the bus.
Very inspiring.
To O'Brien's credit, he did give McRoberts 23 minutes in Denver, and he was rewarded with 10 points, four rebounds, four assists and two steals. Which means O'Brien will bury McRoberts back on the bench soon enough.
There are 19 games left in this lost basketball season. There's a way to make them slightly less "irrelevant.''
Your move, Larry.
---------
O'Brien must go -- for the good of the bad Pacers
Posted: March 7, 2010
http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...the-bad-Pacers
Maybe Jim O'Brien is trying to get himself fired. Maybe he's gone in the tank, just as his team has done for the past few months, and is willing to take the cash for next season and move on back to Florida.
I've written it before, with a mild bit of hesitation.
I'm writing it now, with no hesitation, with major emphasis, with boldfaced capital letters.
O'BRIEN HAS GOT TO GO
We can all agree, this season was stillborn before it got past the first two weeks. Even in that home opener, they played with no energy, no passion, no clue. And it hasn't gotten any better all season.
Maybe that says more about this current group of players than it does about O'Brien, but you can't fire the players.
Ultimately, they're not performing for this guy. They've checked out, zoned out, quit hearing his voice. If it was just a matter of losing, fine, but they're losing badly, losing by double digits, getting outworked on a regular basis.
This team came into the season with the most minimal of expectations. Win three or four more games than last year, end up with 40 total and maybe sneak into the playoffs in the top-heavy Eastern Conference. Instead, they've regressed. Dramatically.
Defensively, they are generally as bad as they were last season, with some statistics slightly better and others slightly worse.
Offensively, though, they've had their greatest decline. This used to be a fun team to watch: competitive, fluid. This year, a still life, 18th in the league in scoring.
I was absolutely floored when I read O'Brien's recent quote in which he suggested the reason the offense was stagnant was because he didn't have Jeff Foster distributing the ball out of the high post.
What? Your offense was built around a guy who never should have been given an extension and has been falling apart the past three years? Excuse me?
And while it's ultimately a good thing that they're assured of a top-five draft choice, the question is, do you really want O'Brien coaching that new player?
I know it would be a cosmetic move, but let O'Brien go now and do one of two things: Either bring Larry Bird down on an interim basis, or give Lester Conner a two-month-long shot. Do something with these final 19 games.
I want to see if Roy Hibbert can be more consistent when given more consistent minutes, when the coach isn't fiddling around matching up with the opponents' big men.
I want to see if someone else can find the light switch in Brandon Rush's head -- assuming there is a light switch, a questionable proposition at best.
I want to see A.J. Price play significant minutes in place of Earl Watson. O'Brien likes to say that he saw all he needed to see when Price played well during a month stretch earlier in the season. So why not continue to develop him and reward his good play during the season? What purpose is served by giving his minutes to Watson, who won't be here next year?
I want to see if the next guy -- Bird, Conner, whoever -- can bring T.J. Ford back to life. Like it or not, you're stuck with
Ford next season, so you might as well get some productivity out of him. Next year, he'll be in the final year of his deal, so that's a good thing, too. It's not all O'Brien's fault, but the bottom line is, he's run off two point guards in his time here, Jamaal Tinsley and Ford.
I mistakenly believed that by giving O'Brien an extension through next season, the players would not treat their coach like a lame duck.
I was wrong. Wrong about that, wrong about the Pacers making the playoffs -- well, not just wrong, but monumentally wrong.
For me, and for the fans who still pay attention to the Pacers, the tipping point came earlier this week after Josh McRoberts' inspired performance against the Los Angeles Lakers. O'Brien was lobbed a softball question about McRoberts, given a chance to laud a guy who rarely gets off the bench, and he slammed him by saying his performance was "irrelevant.'' He then said he wanted to see McRoberts do that in a winning effort, except McRoberts never gets to play when the game is on the line. For his good work against L.A., McRoberts was rewarded with five minutes of garbage time in Portland.
Here was an easy chance to say, "If everybody played with that kind of passion when the game was on the line, we might not be stuck at 20 stinking wins.'' Instead, he threw McRoberts under the bus.
Very inspiring.
To O'Brien's credit, he did give McRoberts 23 minutes in Denver, and he was rewarded with 10 points, four rebounds, four assists and two steals. Which means O'Brien will bury McRoberts back on the bench soon enough.
There are 19 games left in this lost basketball season. There's a way to make them slightly less "irrelevant.''
Your move, Larry.
Comment