Ailene Voisin: Any reason to smile?

#1
from the sacbee.

Ailene Voisin: Any reason to smile?

Thanks to injuries and uncertainty,the Kings enter this season facing several significant questions

By Ailene Voisin -- Bee Sports Columnist
Published 2:15 am PST Monday, November 1, 2004


Murmurs at dinner parties. Inquiries at the supermarket. Chatter on the talk shows. Already there is panic in the streets, with concerned constituents speaking with one increasingly anxious voice: What's wrong with the Kings?



While one might argue that eight preseason games is at least a few weeks premature, Kings fans nonetheless are known for swiftly and accurately charting their team's pulse. A little healthy skepticism indeed seems warranted. If not exactly flat-lining, any time the Phoenix Suns run the Kings out of Arco Arena (see Friday night) is a prompt for the arched eyebrows and furrowed brows.

Factor in the unsettling tenor of last season's playoffs and the contentious developments that transpired during the offseason, and Tuesday's tipoff occurs amid more uncertainty than at any time during the Rick Adelman era.

Chris Webber's knee. Peja Stojakovic's mind-set. Rick Adelman's future. Doug Christie's foot. Bobby Jackson's midsection. The visceral impact of Vlade Divac's departure. The perplexing absence of emotional energy and enthusiasm.


For the sake of further (and future) discussion, let's look a little more closely at the pressing issues and their potential impact on the upcoming season:

I. Injuries. For reasons that mystify many within the NBA, injuries to significant players have become almost epidemic. Most troubling for the Kings is the fact that the recurring ailments are afflicting their older players.

Christie, 34, the most productive player the second half of last season, remains hampered by the unpredictable plantar fasciitis. Jackson, 31, missed 28 games and the entire playoffs last season with a severe abdominal strain. Webber, 31, missed 58 games while recovering from major knee surgery, and when he did return was noticeably limited and wildly erratic, yet insistent upon reclaiming his role as the Kings' dominant player.

Even assuming Christie and Jackson fully recover and unite with Mike Bibby to again form one of the league's elite backcourts, affording rookie Kevin Martin time to develop, questions pertaining to Webber will linger. His availability and level of effectiveness, still unclear after four months of offseason rehab, likely will be determined on a daily basis, which only perpetuates Adelman's dilemma: How many minutes should he play? How many games will he miss? How often will the knee ache and swell, reducing his mobility and effectiveness? How would he accept a reduced role, if necessary?

In the very near future, Webber's status must be clearly defined. Players crave clarity.

II. Webber's presence. Now in his 12th season, he has experienced intermittent swelling that has caused him to sit out games and practices, so don't expect miracles. He probably will never be the consistently forceful presence who exploded around the basket and routinely filled the stat sheet with ease. Nevertheless, he can learn a few more tricks from the departed Divac, who while recognizing that his own low post skills and quickness had deteriorated with age, compensated by becoming an even more creative and precise passer.

If similarly willing to accept more of a collaborative role, Webber, given his abundant skills, could remain a very effective player. Rebounding. Setting screens. Moving the ball. Sharing the high post with Miller. Shedding the mentality of having to be the "go-to guy," in essence relinquishing those duties to Stojakovic and, to a lesser extent, Bibby. Otherwise, the chemistry will be volatile this season, too.

"With any injury," said team president Geoff Petrie, "it comes down to what level of pain you can tolerate. Where that settles in, we don't know yet. But we're all pulling for him."

II. Stojakovic's resolve. This is an immensely important season for Peja, who finished as the league's second-leading scorer and flirted with MVP candidacy until his strangely subdued and inconsistent closing weeks.

To become truly worthy of MVP consideration, Peja, now entering his seventh season, has to continue expanding his offensive repertoire (more dribble moves) and, of even greater importance, assert himself and embrace the responsibility of being the No. 1 option. That means accepting all challenges, including any that might arise in the huddle. Doing so enhances his reputation and his team's postseason prospects.

III. Can Adelman survive? Adelman did a masterful job molding the Kings into the league-leading club during Webber's absence, but his decision to force-feed his hobbled power forward back into the starting lineup completely disrupted the team's cohesion and led to fractured relationships. And like all the Kings officials, he surely has to be asking himself this question: What if he had left his starting unit intact and utilized Webber in shorter increments, insisting further that the offense continued running through Divac and Miller?

In the final year of his contract and with no assurances of an extension, Adelman undoubtedly will have less patience for ineffective play - whatever the reason. And based on last season's experience, his decision regarding Webber should be easier. A repeat performance only ensures his ouster.

IV. Can the Kings recapture that elusive on-court cohesiveness? That all depends on Webber and Adelman. Webber, and his willingness to accept reality. Adelman, and his willingness to react accordingly. The Kings certainly have flaws - namely a lack of frontcourt athleticism and a chronic aversion to defense - but the starting lineup is talented and experienced. Besides, the West is a 10-team scrum and, without Shaq around, is anybody's conference. Soon enough, Adelman and his players will start dropping hints.
 

piksi

Hall of Famer
#2
I think there would be a reason to smile if she somehow got herself fired or transfered to write orbituaries.
 
G

godsthename

Guest
#3
reasons to smile

i will be smilin when i see webber back to his old self. And when their games go so smooth it seems like they never miss a shot, passes are so perfect, and everyone is playing as a team. when i see that it makes me feel as if no one has a chance. i want to see a finals appearance and nothin less.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#5
To be fair, this is NOT a bad column at all.

AV has brought up legitimate concerns. They may not all be MY concerns, but they are concerns worth discussing.

Injuries are a real concern for every NBA team, including ours.

Webber's status is a concern. A number of fans do not think he's worth any further bother. (See the reactions to the Knicks article, for example.) I personally hope, pray and believe that Webber will be able to contribute at something approaching his old levels. That's not guaranteed, however, and Voisin brings up ways he could - even if less able physically - still contribute positively to this team. I have no problem with that at all.

Her comments about Pedja are also dead-on and I have no problems with any of them.

Her take about Adelman's future is certainly a valid one.

I often speak out quite loudly about how Voisin takes things and spins them so wildly you end up dizzy and nauseous. This article isn't like that.

Yes, there is bias in it. That's true of any piece - especially a sports column. But I saw nothing that made me want to tear out my hair. She brings up points we've talked about (okay, argued and screamed about) around here.

There are things that are more true than ever before. Kings fans are deeply divided about Chris Webber, about Pedja, and even about Adelman. One of the biggest reasons why is probably because we have been robbed and we want to be able to blame someone concrete for our feelings of loss...

If you read the article again, try doing so pretending you don't know who wrote it. If you do, I think you'll find it pretty well balanced. I may not agree, as I said, with all her opinions but they are representative of a number of Kings fans.
 
W

Whit Eboy

Guest
#6
VF21 said:
To be fair, this is NOT a bad column at all.
To be fair, we don't need to be fair to a bad columnist who is not fair and is heavily biased.

btw, the name AV is really funny.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#8
Whit Eboy said:
To be fair, we don't need to be fair to a bad columnist who is not fair and is heavily biased.

btw, the name AV is really funny.
Well, as in any case, it always helps your credibility when you criticize someone if you give them credit when credit is due. So in this case I give her some credit for resisting the urge to be, well...herself.

And I would agree that this AV article is quite tame by her standards. Glanced over it, moved on, and didn't even think "gee, what a female dog". Her biases are on display, but if she took this tone/approach all of the time rather than her tabloid tactics she wouldn't have the bad rep she has given herself. People are allowed to have biases, its her sensationalistic antics, personal vendettas, and flat out dishonesty that has gotten her into trouble. Fortunately none of them are particularly on display in this column. (actually she does do her normal "Adelman must" routine and of course slants the whole debate by making assumptions and treating them as fact, but its just normal columnist spin tactics rather than an Ailene special).
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#9
Whit Eboy said:
To be fair, we don't need to be fair to a bad columnist who is not fair and is heavily biased.

btw, the name AV is really funny.
So two wrongs make a right?

Sorry. That's not my style.

I have been a very vocal critic of Voisin's for years. If I'm going to criticize her on this board when I think she's off-base, I'm also going to be fair when I think she's written something decent.
 
W

Whit Eboy

Guest
#10
VF21 said:
So two wrongs make a right?

Sorry. That's not my style.

I have been a very vocal critic of Voisin's for years. If I'm going to criticize her on this board when I think she's off-base, I'm also going to be fair when I think she's written something decent.
:D i know what u mean.

u r right, two wrongs don't make a right, but your fair will never ever make the first wrong to be a right. have u seen AV change her bias for years?

actually i just don't wanna waste my time to read her "articles" any more. AV? who? who cares? u know what? insane people sometimes will told u the right things, and u won't go to the hospital for listening to their points of view.
 
#11
I thought it was a really good article. I didn't agree with all of her assessments and/or conclusions, but they were all laid out perfectly logically and straight forward.

She CAN be a good writer, when she chooses to. As opposed to many of the illiterate swill that pass for sports-writers, who couldn't be good writers if you gave them an extra half a brain for a head start.
 
#12
VF21 said:
I have been a very vocal critic of Voisin's for years. If I'm going to criticize her on this board when I think she's off-base, I'm also going to be fair when I think she's written something decent.
Agreed. I thought it was at least a relevant article, which is saying a lot considering the columns she's written in the past year or so. She even included a couple of facts for a change. I'm not jumping to throw my stamp of approval on the thing, but it was much more tolerable than most of the garbage she writes.
 
#13
Whit Eboy said:
u r right, two wrongs don't make a right, but your fair will never ever make the first wrong to be a right.
QUOTE]

:cool:

my head just took about 3 sharp turns reading that line, i had to go back and read it again.

interesting logic.
 
#15
fakie said:
Whit Eboy said:
u r right, two wrongs don't make a right, but your fair will never ever make the first wrong to be a right.
QUOTE]

:cool:

my head just took about 3 sharp turns reading that line, i had to go back and read it again.

interesting logic.
Well, if you figured that line out, will you explain the next one to me? :D

Whit Eboy said:
actually i just don't wanna waste my time to read her "articles" any more. AV? who? who cares? u know what? insane people sometimes will told u the right things, and u won't go to the hospital for listening to their points of view.
I just know this is going to show up in somebody's sig soon.
 
W

Whit Eboy

Guest
#16
fakie said:
Whit Eboy said:
u r right, two wrongs don't make a right, but your fair will never ever make the first wrong to be a right.
QUOTE]

:cool:

my head just took about 3 sharp turns reading that line, i had to go back and read it again.

interesting logic.
:eek: my grammar is poor.

anyway, i mean AV is an incurable person even if fans are fair to her. she will never ever change her "grudge". actually, who have seen any change from her "articles" for years?

just like i said before: a psychopath may say somethings right, but u won't go to bughouse to listing to their thought.
 
#17
Aileen Voison is paid to write her opinion on sports, in this case specifically, the Kings. You don't have to agree with her every time she writes an article but if you choose to read her articles you should do so with an open mind. If everyone agreed that she was a horribly biased writer who didn't know sports, she wouldn't have a job at the Bee (can't speak to other writers who still have jobs on a national level:D ).

Sac is too small (and has only the one newspaper) to think she'd get away with writing the things she does if a certain percentage of Kings fans didn't agree with her or find her entertaining. To the best of my knowledge, she doesn't syndicate her articles (like some others) and so the only way the Bee makes money and keeps readers is to provide content that is acceptable to their paying customers.

I don't always agree with her, but I do find her takes refreshing at times...just as I found it refreshing tonight to read here that some of her biggest critics read this article with an open mind (whether they agreed with her conclusions or not!).

Good grief, maybe that WAS a blue moon the other night! :D

P.S. Happy Samhain to you, you Pagan Celt!
 
#18
I have had my fill of AV in the 3 or so days that I have been here! Maybe a sense of humor would fit her style better, even with her well thought out takes she simply reeks of DRY. Although she takes herself a big too serious, she does have some good points which somehow redeem her inability to be personable in any way.

When Web impresses the masses, I'll be sure to look her up (or just come to Kingsfans).
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#19
Heheheheh. You're tired of her after three days?

Oh, grasshopper...you have much to learn.

I will give her credit for one thing - she irritates some of us as much as Charlie Rosen or Ric Bucher or that pillar of journalistic virtue, R.E. Graswich - and that's not easy to do!

:D

Bottom line? She does her job. People talk about her columns; they buy the Bee to read her columns. That's what a columnist is all about...
 
#20
I hope no one actually buys the BEE to read HER columns! Just read Rosen's piece in another thread, this guy doesn't write in Hoop or Slam, hehehe...what a crotchety ole' fart!

You're right, she's doing her job if she's still there, and while I don't agree with her bland writing style, she does point at issues that sometimes escape even the most attentive of King's fans, I'm sure. And that's the point, to come away and say "I learned something". But does it have to be so painful??? :0
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#21
Journalists thrive on controversy. Sometimes their ability to spot controversy so they can write about it approaches the miraculous. In fact, you would swear they would need the vision of Superman to see through the walls of Arco into closed practices, locker rooms, etc. but some of them seem to find a way even against all odds.

;)