Larry Legend retires again

The story wasn't bad either.

 

Oops, my bad on that one.

EDIT: Last night, I paid my penance by saying prayers at the grave site of Roger Brown.

 

At his goodbye newser, Larry Bird is asked if someday he'd like an ownership stake in the Pacers. His response: "Depends on how much Herbie leaves me in the will." (Herbie being owner Herb Simon.)

In all seriousness, though Bird also says he knows people willing to buy the Pacers and keep them in Indianapolis. With Herb being in his 80s, his former co-owner brother Mel deceased, and the Simon kids showing no interest in taking over the team, it wouldn't shock me if Bird's next move would be as a front for an ownership group.

 

How many championship teams has Bird built as an executive?

How many teams did he build - as opposed to inheriting a veteran group - as a coach?

He's wise to leave. Unless they can somehow acquire a guy with a nickname and a shoe contract - and Indianapolis isn't exactly top of the list for such dudes when they have a choice - this Pacers group has gone as far as it's going to.

 

This might answer your question, ColdCat:
http://www.pjstar.com/free/x1660539429/Pacers-part-ways-with-Larry-Bird

Reading the article from the Journal-Star paints, for me, a decidedly different picture than the one I got from reading the Indianapolis Star article and the comments that followed here. Being a follower of Missouri Valley Conf. sports as an Illinois State Univ. alum, I admire that one of the Valley's own like Bird has done so well, but I have to wonder about the sugar-coating the Star gave this versus what I read from the Peoria paper today online.

I wish him well and hope he does enjoy life minus a necktie. But I really wonder about the real circumstances of his exit. I do not think I am offbase here based on what I read. Good Luck, Larry.

 

I'm not sure about the AP's use of "parted ways." It sounds like Herb Simon canned him, which is inconceivable. Simon said Bird was welcome to stay as long as he wanted (it was always a handshake deal), and today Bird didn't race out the door, a la Jordan and the Wizards. He stuck around today with Walsh and Pritchard to evaluate potential draft picks, he'll be around on draft day, and he's going to be around during summer league play, too.

 

If you're suggesting that he was really canned--yeah, I think you are off base. There's nothing there to support that other than the somewhat odd "parted ways" word choice. Bird is very much liked by Simon, he just won the Executive of Year Award, and the guy stepping into that GM chair (Pritchard) is someone widely known to be Bird's handpicked choice.

 

He's the only person to win MVP, Coach of the Year and Executive of the Year in the NBA.

He'll admit that he wasn't a big Xs and Os guy, but he knew his limitations and surrounded himself with really good assistants (Dick Harter & Rick Carlisle). He was an almost perfect coach for a veteran team -- the core of Miller, Smits and Dale/Antonio Davis had been around for quite a while, but Mark Jackson, Derrick McKey, Sam Perkins & Chris Mullin are veterans that had been brought in during that era (and, IMO, his best team was the 1998 team that lost to Jordan's Bulls in a great 7-game series ... not the 2000 team that went to the Finals). They didn't need a tactical genius, but a quiet motivator. I remember Reggie Miller saying something to the likes of "I pinch myself when I realize Larry Bird is my coach" shortly after he was hired.

As an executive, he took over a team that was in complete shambles and was really disliked even by locals. He shed a lot of the bad apples and took his time to rebuild the team, without going for quick fixes. What resulted was a pretty solid, well-put-together team this year that's one stud player away from being really good.

 

Larry was not a natural executive.
Needless to say, however, he does have a natural feel for the game.
And he is just a natural leader of men.

 

Stoney, If my interpretation is wrong, it is because of AP's phrasing. If everything was done amicably, then the AP writer should have found another phrase. Thanks for your info.

 

And it should be noted that he has also drafted very well in recent years with picks that seemed dubious and were questioned at the time, but have turned out far better than expected (Hibbert, George, Hansbrough, etc). He also nailed last year's pick (Kawhi Leonard) although he traded it to San Antonio for George Hill (a win win trade for both teams). Bird went through a rocky spell earlier in his tenure, but the last few years seems like he's been making all the right moves--it's not easy to turn an NBA team around without any big name free agents or top 10 lottery picks, but Bird seems to have done it with this bunch.

But I think Piotr has a point--not sure how much further this group can climb without that star calibur scorer. They need that one alpha dog piece to push them over into title contention, without it they stay stuck in good but not quite good enough territory.

 

There are what, maybe, one, two or three players who can get you to that status? Carmelo Anthony once was on that list, but look at the Knicks now. I'm not sure Dwight Howard is that player.

Unless you're lucky enough to get the first pick in a year when a superstar player is available, or draft wisely when you have a few years in a row of lousy picks, or get one of the few prized free agents, at best you're hoping for a conference final, and a little luck along the way.