Voisin: Another Take on Adelman Extension

[uolj]

Ok, well I see that as splitting hairs. I guess Voison could have stated, "I and many other people infer that 'Miller, the target of much of Webber's offseason sniping...'"

I think that would be ridiculous, and go against the practices of nearly every human being on the planet.

Well, that was my point... I think that because people fail to split those hairs, and because the reader/listener fails to recognize that hairs might not be split that could be, the facts of a situation end up getting altered, and the world is full of misinformed people. Heck, half the stuff we discuss here would be moot if everybody split more hairs, in my opinion.

And by the way, I thought that the version of the Webber interview translated by piksi in another thread was a good example of stating something as an inference and not a fact.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Ok, well I see that as splitting hairs. I guess Voison could have stated, "I and many other people infer that 'Miller, the target of much of Webber's offseason sniping...'"

I think that would be ridiculous, and go against the practices of nearly every human being on the planet.

Perhaps it would; I don't know enough people on the planet to assess the validity of that statement... but for Voisin to misrepresent herself by stating that Miller is believed to be the target of Webber's "offseason sniping," as if she has access to people and information that she does not actually have access to, is irresponsible journalism. Who believes that? How does she know? None of the players and no one associated with the team will talk to her, so where does she get her "information" from?

Maybe it's just me, but I think that if you write an opinion column, you should not represent yourself as if you have access to "inside" information, unless you actually do.

 

[Kingsgurl]

Please check out the 8th paragraph. The quote utilized by Voisin in today's piece was ORIGINALLY given to Marty McNeal. Why? Because Adelman doesn't talk to Voisin.

And there you have it. The crux of Aileens bitter animosity. It's her JOB to write about the Kings, and the two major players on the Kings who will NOT speak to her directly? Chris Webber and Rick Adelman. Adelman even limited her access to places she used to roam freely. She has to get quotes from these two from other, more connected, writers at the Bee. She managed to drag Webber into a discusion about Adelman's extension......why? If you follow her writings, you will see, the players who she quotes directly are few, and they, invariably, receive proper reward from her in the form of positive articles. Vlade was her favorite, because he would talk to anyone Peja too, gets glowing accolades, probably because he still thinks he should talk to anyone with a press pass

I actually agree that a contract extension is not in anyones best interest at this time. Marty Mac's article was dead on. Hers is just rehashing to stir controversy.

 

[sloter]

The problem with Webber's comments are not really what he said. The problem is that he, as someone who failed the team through his suspensions, and as someone whose presence coincided with a dramatic drop in team effectiveness, needed to be more prudent about what he said publically. Even though he was very diplomatic in not naming names, his comments were still harsh, and probably too harsh to be aired in public that way.

In addition, given that Webber messed up with his suspensions and given that the team failed to achieve its goals, the appropriate response would be to criticize yourself more harshly than anybody else. While it sounds like Webber does acknowledge to himself that he can improve, he has a hard time expressing that in his public statements. So it comes across as him criticizing others without pointing the finger at himself. Even the best player must be his own harshest critic in order for his criticism of others to be taken seriously.

Yes, sir!

 

[Kingsgurl]

AND, she accomplishes her objectives quite well, as you can see. People are, even now, piling on Webber, even though the article was supposed to be about Adelman's extension.

Do you think, in general, people are more like sheep, or lemmings?

 

[VF21]

"The target of much of Webber's off-season sniping..."

He had one press conference right after the playoffs and one interview with Marty McNeal a short time ago. In those public statements, people have said he lambasted Pedja. Now, all of a sudden, it was Miller who was the target?

Boy, I sure didn't see that one coming. Am I the only one who has problems following her logic?

But, as Kingsgurl points out, once again Voisin has accomplished her objective. She has created a mini-controversy where none really exists.

At least it gave us something to talk about.

 

[Kingsgurl]

Baa, baaa

 

[NME]

In those public statements, people have said he lambasted Pedja. Now, all of a sudden, it was Miller who was the target?

And don't forget those other times when it was clearly all about Vlade...I mean Peja...no, Miller...now Jabari (?!?)...back to Peja!

That Webber is tricky, I tell you.

 

[50pts]

The problem with Webber's comments are not really what he said. The problem is that he, as someone who failed the team through his suspensions, and as someone whose presence coincided with a dramatic drop in team effectiveness, needed to be more prudent about what he said publically. Even though he was very diplomatic in not naming names, his comments were still harsh, and probably too harsh to be aired in public that way.

In addition, given that Webber messed up with his suspensions and given that the team failed to achieve its goals, the appropriate response would be to criticize yourself more harshly than anybody else. While it sounds like Webber does acknowledge to himself that he can improve, he has a hard time expressing that in his public statements. So it comes across as him criticizing others without pointing the finger at himself. Even the best player must be his own harshest critic in order for his criticism of others to be taken seriously.

Of course, I don't think anybody on the team has publicly stated any problems with what Webber said. Only Adelman has said he wished Webber wouldn't go public like that. I think the biggest negative was the effect it had on the fan base. Webber should know that he must be extremely careful with what he says to the media, because there are fans, columnists, and radio personalities that don't think it's appropriate for him to say those things, and it will cause a stir like the one over the summer. So really, he should have erred on the side of self-criticism, or just not granted the interview at all.

yes [font=&quot]nicely [/font]put

 

[Markezi]

My god, people are consumed with their hatred for Voisin! It's incredible! Webber bashers have nothing over you guys!

Besides, since when are sports writers supposed to position themselves as the ultimate source for truth in facts? Sports writers are paid to give OPINIONS.

Voisin is not going to water down her points by attempting to make sure nobody is offended with her overly conscientious PC language. So Miller was a target of Webber's rant - who cares? Her point could not be more dead on exact: Adelman needs to step up to the plate and be more active in making difficult decisions. Bravo.

 

[uolj]

My god, people are consumed with their hatred for Voisin! It's incredible! Webber bashers have nothing over you guys!

Besides, since when are sports writers supposed to position themselves as the ultimate source for truth in facts? Sports writers are paid to give OPINIONS.

Voisin is not going to water down her points by attempting to make sure nobody is offended with her overly conscientious PC language. So Miller was a target of Webber's rant - who cares? Her point could not be more dead on exact: Adelman needs to step up to the plate and be more active in making difficult decisions. Bravo.

I don't feel like getting into this same topic again, but I do want to make one point.

Your comments do not in any way address the criticisms that we have levied against Voisin. So I am not disagreeing with you, but if you are trying to respond to what many of us have said about her articles, your post has missed the point completely. Again.

 

[Markezi]

I don't feel like getting into this same topic again, but I do want to make one point.

Your comments do not in any way address the criticisms that we have levied against Voisin. So I am not disagreeing with you, but if you are trying to respond to what many of us have said about her articles, your post has missed the point completely. Again.

Actually, it addresses the thread exactly. The rest of the white noise coming from the same people who always bag on Voisin, nitpicking her every word, getting unnecessarily distracted by the minutia that Voisin haters focus on, and refusing to address the important issues that she brings to light has, as always, missed the point completely.

Again.

 

[Heuge]

Actually, it addresses the thread exactly. The rest of the white noise coming from the same people who always bag on Voisin, nitpicking her every word, getting unnecessarily distracted by the minutia that Voisin haters focus on, and refusing to address the important issues that she brings to light has, as always, missed the point completely.

Again.

If she wouldn't bring so much "minutia" then maybe it would be easier to get to the important points she is trying to make.

 

[NME]

Actually, it addresses the thread exactly. The rest of the white noise coming from the same people who always bag on Voisin, nitpicking her every word, getting unnecessarily distracted by the minutia that Voisin haters focus on, and refusing to address the important issues that she brings to light has, as always, missed the point completely.

Again.

Translation: Facts aren't important, because she agrees with you.

 

[Markezi]

Translation: Facts aren't important, because she agrees with you.

I could say the same thing about Webber-lovers.

Besides, the points that are refuted as factually false, could all very well be true. Nobody on this board knows for sure - that makes it pretty fascinating that people get so livid whenever she types on her keyboard. I'd bet my next paycheck that Voisin's opinions are probably based in more fact than anyone else around here as she is directly connected with the Kings.

 

[Mike B]

Markezi,

I certainly agree with the notion that people seem to take the position that Voisin is factually false. I certainly agree with the opinion that her assertions are unproven, but they have not been disproven - in fact the Kings have not come out and said that they have never shopped Chris Webber. The DID do that with Peja. I'm thinking her assertions MAY have some validity. Am I sure - of course not.

 

[Ryle]

I totally agree that he doesn't deserve an extension at this point. If the Kings don't get it done this year then Adelman is gone(I said this last year as well and it didn't happen so who knows).


By the way, I'm a "Webber-lover" and I can think for myself and don't need a columnist to form my opinions.

 

[Heuge]

I certainly agree with the opinion that her assertions are unproven, but they have not been disproven - in fact the Kings have not come out and said that they have never shopped Chris Webber.

That is a very valid argument that I have not heard yet.
The only objection that I may bring is that the Kings are not a very vocal orginaztion. I think the Webber trade rumors are absurb. Maybe this is how the organization feels, and doesn't feel it owes an explaination. With Peja, shopping around is not absurd, since he asked to be traded. They gave an explaination for him because it was warranted.

 

[Mike B]

Heuge - that is a very reasonable take.

Ryle - absolutely! A sports columnist is just there to give an opinion/angle - otherwise the athletes themselves would be writing the articles. Voisin has as valid a place as any sports writer. Every writer has a degree of inherent bias. In sports it is fairly harmless.

 

[Bricklayer]

Actually I am fairly sure that Petrie did come out early in the summer with a "we have no interest in trading" statement about Webber, but that's beside the point (and I don't remember the actual quote).

The point is that NOBODY else is talking about Webber being traded. Not the Kings. Not other teams he would be traded to. Not his agent. Not other agents. Not anybody. When a single voice stands bleating in the woods for months on end and nobody else is buzzing...uh-uh. In any other cirumstance that voice is shrugged off entirely. It is seized on and "legitimated" here only because that voice is saying what some people WANT to hear, not because it should be taken seriously if judged by the same standards which we hold every other rumor-mongerer up to.

 

[Ryle]

Heuge - that is a very reasonable take.

Ryle - absolutely! A sports columnist is just there to give an opinion/angle - otherwise the athletes themselves would be writing the articles. Voisin has as valid a place as any sports writer. Every writer has a degree of inherent bias. In sports it is fairly harmless.

She was one of the first last year to write about the "discord" in the locker room. I think she has been given the task by the editor's of the Bee to stir the pot.......which she does quite well.

Only problem I have with her is she seems to hold grudges against certain people/players and doesn't report stuff objectively.....sounds like some people on this board, myself included....LOL

 

[HndsmCelt]

Yawn, these trade Webber threads are not only pointless and boreing but more repative than Mc Donalds comercials on a Sat morning.

 

[Mike B]

Bricklayer and Ryle,

I think both takes you make are legitimate, but so what?

Voisin has an audience just as the pro/anti Webber folks do. I don't see either side as "correct."

I agree that Voisin holds a grudge, or is just consistent in her opinion. Regardless, I think she brings something to the table - of course, I do tend to share her view on the subject. Her trade talk is speculative, but I do think it has a certain logic behind it.

 

[VF21]

As one of Voisin's most vocal critics, my main complaint is that she often has good takes but they're obscured by repetitive and pointless jabs against Webber and Adelman.

The best example I could find was the column she wrote about the need for a facilitator to address the arena issue. It was a really good take but she couldn't resist taking a jab at Webber. Why was that necessary?

 

[50pts]

Are you really trying to maintain that it is unfair to attribute something to someone unless that person explicitly makes a statement to that effect. That would be absurd.

People make inferences every day. Courts of law routinely make inferences based on what is said (and hold on, this may be a shocker) what is not said. People are routinely sent to jail or found liable based on such (circumstantial) evidence.

To require an explicit and positive statement is absurd. Say someone asks me "who do you love in your family," and I answer "my mom" and fail to mention my dad. The person asks again and I say, "hold on, let me think about it." Then again, I say, "I love my mom." Would it be out of line to think that I don't love my dad. According to your argument it would be.

With regard to Webber and Miller this is exactly what happened. Chris said, "I only want to play with hard workers" (or something like that, I can't remember).

He is then asked who the hard workers are. He names most of his teammates. Then, he stops for several seconds and says "hold on..I want to make sure I didn't leave anyone out." He mulls over the names he previously mentioned, adds one or two more and says "that's it".

Yet, we are not allowed to assume that Chris Webber believes that Brad Miller is not a hard worker. According to your logic, we could only make such an "assumption" if Chris Webber comes out and explicitly says that Brad Miller is not a hard worker. (Even if Chris really believed that Miller didn't work hard, he is not stupid enough to make such an explicit statement).

word, couldn't have said it better!!!!

 

[Kingsgurl]

Well, let me see a show of hands. Who thinks Miller gives it all on the court during games? Everyone? We agree, Chris agrees, as quoted in the article (everyone always leaves out the quote about Brad ON the court, why?) Now, who thinks Brad could be an even BETTER player if he devoted some time to the weight room? I know I feel that way, apparently Chris does too, if we are to infer this from his statment in the article. Now, you can take issue with the fact that he said, or rather inferred it, but it's a little hard to dispute the validity of it
Looking at the photos taken on their trip to China, where Brad and Chris are hanging together on the Great Wall in about 30 different shots, it appears Brad isn't taking issue with it. Perhaps we should follow his lead?

 

[vladetomiller]

Well, let me see a show of hands. Who thinks Miller gives it all on the court during games? Everyone? We agree, Chris agrees, as quoted in the article (everyone always leaves out the quote about Brad ON the court, why?) Now, who thinks Brad could be an even BETTER player if he devoted some time to the weight room? I know I feel that way, apparently Chris does too, if we are to infer this from his statment in the article. Now, you can take issue with the fact that he said, or rather inferred it, but it's a little hard to dispute the validity of it
Looking at the photos taken on their trip to China, where Brad and Chris are hanging together on the Great Wall in about 30 different shots, it appears Brad isn't taking issue with it. Perhaps we should follow his lead?

Well i think that webber can devote some more time to hit the weights and add more muscle and toughness. Train more to get some of the vertical that he used to have. He can try perfecting those jumpers, work more on the hook etc etc etc.

Bibby can work on his defense, he can work on cutting down the turnovers and getting better at the three point land

Peja can get better everywhere else except shooting

etc etc etc

I can say that about all the players in the league and in fact i expect every nba player to work 8 hours a day like i do, atleast doing those things that we do for free and they can do it getting paid millions.

But the point is "Do they do that".

On the other hand, i as a fan have a right to say that mostly because no one cares, whereas when a player says that about a teammate then thats a different story. Is webber perfect to say those things, i guess not. But webb supporters here will always find him as the perfect person and some have even started developing hatred towards kings players because of their preference of webber. Forget about the hatred for the other teams players, that can get real ugly, wishing for injuries and all that. But to say that Peja has to shut up and play , whereas webb can talk all he wants when he clearly didnt bring it on, thats odd.

They always find some reason to forgive webber even during the bad period last year, why is he special, what has he done that some other player in the nba (with similar salary, not the overblown ones but realistic ones like duncan, kobe, etc) hasnt done. What has he done that Peja hasnt done for the team, i suppose Peja has been more of a better team player than webb has been, never said anything bad about anyone, no one complained about his shot selection from the fan base or from the commentators or from the coaching staff and he improved every year. But he has to shut up and play when a teammate accuses him of something, WEIRD. The person who was saying things should shut up and play and if he has something to say then say it in private, not to the press.

Probably for the webber supporters she might be wrong, but for most others she has been right. Adelman was brought in to get a ring and he failed, you can spin it all you want to say that it was missed free throws and that shots didnt go in, the other team missed free throws too. They managed to win, despite having a lower free throw %. Against the wolves, people keep saying that if that rattling rim shot would have gone in then the kings would have been in the WCF. DUH, but is that the best shot that you can get as a coach, having one of the best three point shooting team, you dont have a play that is designed to get a three pointer from one of your better three point shooters. Why wasnt there a play designed for bibby or peja to get the last shot for a three, it is the coachs fault and not that the play evolved that way, he is supposed to design a play that will get a shot from either bibby or peja or even christie.

Vlade made that three pointer against the jazz a few years back that took them to the semi finals, if he didnt make that buzzer beater then you will not be boasting of that great playoff record as many here do, BUT was that the best the coach can do, late in the game with a 1 point lead and you let your center take a three pointer as the last resort. Thats all coaching faults to me and probably there few others who think that way and maybe voisin is one of them. Among those who think that those WCF appearances and the semi finals are achivements there might be others who want the ring and mind you this team was ranked in the top three in the salaries. They got the best talent and was managed by the GM of the year, then you have to blame someone and not just fate for missed free throws and missed shots.

I dont blame voisin for blaming it on webb and adelman and i am sure there are many who have the same opinion and if that makes us haters or idiots so be it

 

[PT Cruiser 9ROC]

Well i think that webber can devote some more time to hit the weights and add more muscle and toughness. Train more to get some of the vertical that he used to have. He can try perfecting those jumpers, work more on the hook etc etc etc.

What, do you think he was loafing around playing hopskotch in the 16 months since his surgery? I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed, but upon returning, Webber looked as ripped as he ever was. In fact, according to one of the Kings reports in the Bee a while back, he actually toned down the muscle, which I guess can be an contributing factor towards his suprising looseness in the Rockets game.

Look, I know I'm being a little nitpicky here, but don't take it to offense. I do appreciate the fact that you're trying to bring the other side of the issue to light in a reasonable manner. But I just believe that, in an argument over the content in Voisin's writing, we shouldn't be learning from her, but rather, we should be avoiding the use of baseless and false statements in our debates.

 

[Mad D]

What, do you think he was loafing around playing hopskotch in the 16 months since his surgery? I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed, but upon returning, Webber looked as ripped as he ever was. In fact, according to one of the Kings reports in the Bee a while back, he actually toned down the muscle, which I guess can be an attributing factor towards his suprising looseness in the Rockets game.

Yeh thats right. He had to tone down because bulkier muscles meant slower/less mobility.

 

[Kingsgurl]

Well i think that webber can devote some more time to hit the weights and add more muscle and toughness. Train more to get some of the vertical that he used to have. He can try perfecting those jumpers, work more on the hook etc etc etc.

Actually, a part of Webb's problem last year, aside from the obvious restrictions on his movement due to the surgery, was the extra bulk (muscle) he put on in his upper body. This year he looks much more porportional in his upper and lower body mass. Train to get more of his vertical back? Just what the heck do you think he's been doing? You can say a lot of things negatively about Webb, his conditioning and commitment to such aren't one of them.

I can say that about all the players in the league and in fact i expect every nba player to work 8 hours a day like i do, atleast doing those things that we do for free and they can do it getting paid millions.

But the point is "Do they do that".

Wasn't thaat, essentially, what Chris was asking his team mates to do? Some of them (Bobby, Bibby etc.) already do.

On the other hand, i as a fan have a right to say that mostly because no one cares, whereas when a player says that about a teammate then thats a different story.

You have the right because no one cares? Maybe when a team mate says something, it might make a difference, might give them pause to think.

Forget about the hatred for the other teams players, that can get real ugly, wishing for injuries and all that.

How about we forget about hatred for any of the Kings?

But to say that Peja has to shut up and play , whereas webb can talk all he wants when he clearly didnt bring it on, thats odd.

Peja is talking about a trade, leaving. Chris is talking about trying to win. What play offs were you watching?

Probably for the webber supporters she might be wrong, but for most others she has been right. Adelman was brought in to get a ring and he failed

Actually, as virtually EVERYONE in this thread has said, the decision not to extend him at this time is a good one, for various reasons. What does Adelmans' extension have to do with Webber Lovers again?

They got the best talent and was managed by the GM of the year, then you have to blame someone and not just fate for missed free throws and missed shots.

I'd have to say it was a collective failure. Win as a team, lose as a team. Why do you have to find one single person to shoulder all the blame? That's not how it works in reality. Everyone has a stake in failing to acheive the ultimate goal, even the GM.

I dont blame voisin for blaming it on webb and adelman and i am sure there are many who have the same opinion and if that makes us haters or idiots so be it