i KNOW yuichi ain't up in here talkin' bout dudes being asshurt!
also, i picked the suns to go to the finals before the playoffs were even close to starting so I hope you aren't insinuating that I (the only Nuggets fan here) am on the bandwagon for the Suns. If so, I got one of the better seats cuz I been on that shit since Amare proved he was back early in the season.
and this is just golden right here:
they violated the rules (note: they are professionals, getting paid lucrative sums to be just that), NBA committee didn't make any exceptions, and suspensions were given out accordingly. That's it.
Uh, you been hangin' at the Stern mansion or what Yuich? Sippin' Arnold Palmers with the Commish and whatnot? Haha.
they violated the rules (note: they are professionals, getting paid lucrative sums to be just that), NBA committee didn't make any exceptions, and suspensions were given out accordingly. That's it.
Uh, you been hangin' at the Stern mansion or what Yuich? Sippin' Arnold Palmers with the Commish and whatnot? Haha.
I'm not a huge fan of Simmons, but he's got a good piece on this today:
Let's say you're one of the best seven players on the Phoenix Suns. You love Nash -- he's your emotional leader, your meal ticket to the Finals, the ideal teammate and someone who makes you happy to play basketball every day for a living. He's killing himself to win a championship. His nose was split open in Game 1. His back bothers him to the point that he has to lie down on the sidelines during breaks. He's battling a real cheap-shot artist (Bruce Bowen) who's trying to shove and trip him on every play. But he keeps coming and coming, and eventually everyone follows suit. Just as things were falling apart in Game 4 and you were staring at the end of your season, he willed you back into the game and saved the day.
Suddenly, he gets body-checked into a press table for no real reason on an especially cheap play. You're standing 20 feet away. Instinctively, you run a few steps toward the guy who did it -- after all, your meal ticket is lying on the court in a crumpled heap -- before remembering that you can't leave your bench. So you go back and watch everything else unfold from there. Twenty-four hours later, you get suspended for Game 5 because your instincts as a teammate kicked in for 1.7 seconds.
Think about how dumb this is. What kind of league penalizes someone for reacting like a good teammate after his franchise player just got decked? Imagine you're playing pickup at a park, you're leading a game 10-3, your buddy is driving for the winning layup, and some stranger clotheslines your buddy from behind and knocks him into the metal pole. Do you react? Do you take a couple of steps toward him? I bet you do. For the NBA to pretend it can create a fairy-tale league in which these reactions can be removed from somebody's DNA -- almost like a chemical castration -- I mean, how stupid is that?
It's understandable, and every player (professional or otherwise) would have acted the way Diaw and Stoudamire did. Step the fuck up for your teammates.
But do you guys suggest the NBA handle these matters completely on a case by case basis and let there be exceptions?
Apparently, the NBA job description includes playing within the boundaries of an orderly and professional atmosphere. Stu Jackson and David Stern have really let this be known especially after the Palace incident. Surely, rushing onto the court with vengeful intent is not part of that ideal.
This is coming from someone who's been completely out of line on the court (during my younger days) and gotten threats from people as well. Not a dirty player by any means though.
It's understandable, and every player (professional or otherwise) would have acted the way Diaw and Stoudamire did. Step the fuck up for your teammates.
But do you guys suggest the NBA handle these matters completely on a case by case basis and let there be exceptions?
Yes--do away with the bench rule entirely. Handle the issue on a case-by-case basis. Maybe even find some "professionals getting paid lucrative sums" to act as arbiters.
But do you guys suggest the NBA handle these matters completely on a case by case basis and let there be exceptions?
I sure don't. If you make it subjective like that, then there's going to be nonstop bitching about "How come Player X got a bigger punishment than Player Y? Favoritism!" And there probably will be an uneven application of punishments. And so no progress will have been made.
I do think the rule is kinda crappy. I understand why it was implemented--and that it was implemented to be pretty unfair in hopes of squelching any bench-clearing brawls before they start--but the league is different than it was, what, 10 years ago when the rule was first made? But still...this rule doesn't work, so what, then, is the solution?
Matt Barnes is a turd on a stick. He is a wannabe Shawn Marion
Marion has been real quiet this post-season.
There's a lot of big dogs on that porch.
He was pretty great in game 3 and he played some crucial D down the stretch in game 4.
I still am amazed every time that dude makes a shot. Most 'flicted release in the L.
I don't know if Barnes can be called out too quick though- some people just flourish under certain styles. Barnes couldn't hang under Mo Cheeks, but he's done fairly well (and consistently, all season) under Nelson. (Same can be said for Nash working under D'Antoni) Marion, Barnes is not. But he could be a solid player for the next few years if the W's hang on to him... (cap problems in the future in Oaktown...) I don't see him doing so well outside of the "D? What's D? RUN MOTHERFUCKER" Nelson system.
Marion's been quiet this post season mainly for 2 reasons imo: In round 1: Lamar Odom beats the crap out of him on every possession. He's just too big, but D'Antoni doesn't want to double Odom b/c of Kobe. Odom's hit and miss play and the lakers just sucking all around still ended up with a Suns win, even with a beat up Marion In round 2: Marion is starting at the 3, which is different than where he normally starts, (at PF). He uses his small size to his advantage at pf, as he is a lot quicker (esp. away from the ball) than most assigned to defend him- thus baseline dunks and uncontested threes, which are the source of most of his offense. He's started so far this series for defensive purposes, to be on parker and use his size and wingspan against the frenchman, and he's done ok. He's had some nice blocks and is rebounding better than either of the F/C they've got out there... but i doubt he'll be utilized in that role tonight, as the suns need his offense.
If he's on tonight, I predict 35+ out of him, once he gets going, he's ridiculously hard for opponents to stop.
The bottom line is, Stern and Co. are not fucking around. They do not want a Malace at the Palace to EVER happen again.
Do I agree with the stringent officiating and zero tolerance (zero emotion) rules? No. But as a fan you gotta understand where the league's been and what drastic changes it HAD to make to keep its employees in check.
The bottom line is, Stern and Co. are not fucking around. They do not want a Malace at the Palace to EVER happen again.
Do I agree with the stringent officiating and zero tolerance (zero emotion) rules? No. But as a fan you gotta understand where the league's been and what drastic changes it HAD to make to keep its employees in check.
Dude, the rule was not occasioned by the Pistons/Pacers brawl--it substantially predates it.
I support having a rule that penalizes players for contributing to altercations. I just think that this rule is a very poor one and sets the bar for absolute liability way too low.
The bottom line is, Stern and Co. are not fucking around. They do not want a Malace at the Palace to EVER happen again. But as a fan you gotta understand where the league's been and what drastic changes it HAD to make to keep its employees in check.
I respectfully disagree, oh scientist. I'm gonna have to side w/ the likes of Mike Kahn on this one (gasp!)... The suspensions are symptomatic of much larger problems: http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/6815442
I sure don't. If you make it subjective like that, then there's going to be nonstop bitching about "How come Player X got a bigger punishment than Player Y? Favoritism!" And there probably will be an uneven application of punishments. And so no progress will have been made.
The bottom line is, Stern and Co. are not fucking around. They do not want a Malace at the Palace to EVER happen again.
Do I agree with the stringent officiating and zero tolerance (zero emotion) rules? No. But as a fan you gotta understand where the league's been and what drastic changes it HAD to make to keep its employees in check.
Dude, the rule was not occasioned by the Pistons/Pacers brawl--it substantially predates it.
I support having a rule that penalizes players for contributing to altercations. I just think that this rule is a very poor one and sets the bar for absolute liability way too low.
I am not that old, so I can not speak, but the Palace brawl was the one that caught nation-wide exposure. It was one of the worst cases of NBA violence because it was a free for all between players, fans, and managers.
The way I see it, if they did away with the bench rule it would create more opportunities for players to react and consequently confront each other. Besides even if punches were not thrown, a gang of grown men pushing and holding each other back creates just as much negative publicity, something that Stern does not need anymore.
For the record, I am down for players to come in with doo-rags, sport a Dolphins jersey, and clearing the bench to start a brawl.
NOW DEAL YOU DUDES! The NBA is still a great thing.
I sense a lot of anti-NBA sentiment among casual sports fans. They feel it's rigged and sometimes it's hard to argue that. Shit like this does NOT help. Ratings are down this year, too.
I sense a lot of anti-NBA sentiment among casual sports fans. They feel it's rigged and sometimes it's hard to argue that. Shit like this does NOT help. Ratings are down this year, too.
Yeah I am really disappointed with the rigidity of the play. It just seems like the trend is to empower the refs and league officials over the players and coaches.
The bottom line is, Stern and Co. are not fucking around. They do not want a Malace at the Palace to EVER happen again. But as a fan you gotta understand where the league's been and what drastic changes it HAD to make to keep its employees in check.
I respectfully disagree, oh scientist. I'm gonna have to side w/ the likes of Mike Kahn on this one (gasp!)... The suspensions are symptomatic of much larger problems: http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/6815442
At the core of the argument, that is essentially what I said about the NBA when they placed the dress code, new ball, zero tolerance officiating, etc. Image, corporate sponsorship, high net worth individuals; it all ties in to the schemes of running a big business. I remember at the beginning of the season, #24 was really weird, now it seems normal to me.
I sense a lot of anti-NBA sentiment among casual sports fans. They feel it's rigged and sometimes it's hard to argue that. Shit like this does NOT help. Ratings are down this year, too.
All this shit would be peripheral to you, if your team was still in it.
I sense a lot of anti-NBA sentiment among casual sports fans. They feel it's rigged and sometimes it's hard to argue that. Shit like this does NOT help. Ratings are down this year, too.
All this shit would be peripheral to you, if your team was still in it.
NOW DEAL YOU DUDES.
My team dealt w/ two suspensions last year. Chill, B.
I sense a lot of anti-NBA sentiment among casual sports fans. They feel it's rigged and sometimes it's hard to argue that. Shit like this does NOT help. Ratings are down this year, too.
All this shit would be peripheral to you, if your team was still in it.
NOW DEAL YOU DUDES.
My team dealt w/ two suspensions last year. Chill, B.
I support having a rule that penalizes players for contributing to altercations. I just think that this rule is a very poor one and sets the bar for absolute liability way too low.
absolutely on point
is there going to be video replay... this is not a foot on the line 3 or designated area offensive foul shit
step on to the court but do not get involved you get a heavy fine
get into an altercation off the bench you get game suspension
whats so hard about that
did anyone think about this
technical shit like this is ridiculous i mean hypothetically a guy could jump off his bench seat in frustration slipon a gatorade glass and stumble on to the court
doing this in the series is ridiculous
but if spurs struggle and suns (at home) run theor offence and are hot theis game could be close..even a victory
a beautiful series that did not need to be spoiled by such bullshit
PS cosine on the jazz hatt (never was i more satisfied in archrival series..rodman head games leading to malone ejections, jordan final shots)
Comments
It's on!
also, i picked the suns to go to the finals before the playoffs were even close to starting so I hope you aren't insinuating that I (the only Nuggets fan here) am on the bandwagon for the Suns. If so, I got one of the better seats cuz I been on that shit since Amare proved he was back early in the season.
and this is just golden right here:
Uh, you been hangin' at the Stern mansion or what Yuich? Sippin' Arnold Palmers with the Commish and whatnot? Haha.
I'm not a huge fan of Simmons, but he's got a good piece on this today:
But do you guys suggest the NBA handle these matters completely on a case by case basis and let there be exceptions?
Apparently, the NBA job description includes playing within the boundaries of an orderly and professional atmosphere. Stu Jackson and David Stern have really let this be known especially after the Palace incident. Surely, rushing onto the court with vengeful intent is not part of that ideal.
This is coming from someone who's been completely out of line on the court (during my younger days) and gotten threats from people as well.
Yes--do away with the bench rule entirely. Handle the issue on a case-by-case basis. Maybe even find some "professionals getting paid lucrative sums" to act as arbiters.
I sure don't. If you make it subjective like that, then there's going to be nonstop bitching about "How come Player X got a bigger punishment than Player Y? Favoritism!" And there probably will be an uneven application of punishments. And so no progress will have been made.
I do think the rule is kinda crappy. I understand why it was implemented--and that it was implemented to be pretty unfair in hopes of squelching any bench-clearing brawls before they start--but the league is different than it was, what, 10 years ago when the rule was first made? But still...this rule doesn't work, so what, then, is the solution?
I don't know if Barnes can be called out too quick though- some people just flourish under certain styles. Barnes couldn't hang under Mo Cheeks,
Marion, Barnes is not. But he could be a solid player for the next few years if the W's hang on to him... (cap problems in the future in Oaktown...) I don't see him doing so well outside of the "D? What's D? RUN MOTHERFUCKER" Nelson system.
Marion's been quiet this post season mainly for 2 reasons imo:
In round 1: Lamar Odom beats the crap out of him on every possession. He's just too big, but D'Antoni doesn't want to double Odom b/c of Kobe. Odom's hit and miss play and the lakers just sucking all around still ended up with a Suns win, even with a beat up Marion
In round 2: Marion is starting at the 3, which is different than where he normally starts, (at PF). He uses his small size to his advantage at pf, as he is a lot quicker (esp. away from the ball) than most assigned to defend him- thus baseline dunks and uncontested threes, which are the source of most of his offense. He's started so far this series for defensive purposes, to be on parker and use his size and wingspan against the frenchman, and he's done ok. He's had some nice blocks and is rebounding better than either of the F/C they've got out there... but i doubt he'll be utilized in that role tonight, as the suns need his offense.
If he's on tonight, I predict 35+ out of him, once he gets going, he's ridiculously hard for opponents to stop.
Do I agree with the stringent officiating and zero tolerance (zero emotion) rules? No. But as a fan you gotta understand where the league's been and what drastic changes it HAD to make to keep its employees in check.
Dude, the rule was not occasioned by the Pistons/Pacers brawl--it substantially predates it.
I support having a rule that penalizes players for contributing to altercations. I just think that this rule is a very poor one and sets the bar for absolute liability way too low.
I respectfully disagree, oh scientist. I'm gonna have to side w/ the likes of Mike Kahn on this one (gasp!)...
The suspensions are symptomatic of much larger problems: http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/6815442
Didn't this just happen with the current rule?
Such bullshit.
I am not that old, so I can not speak, but the Palace brawl was the one that caught nation-wide exposure. It was one of the worst cases of NBA violence because it was a free for all between players, fans, and managers.
The way I see it, if they did away with the bench rule it would create more opportunities for players to react and consequently confront each other. Besides even if punches were not thrown, a gang of grown men pushing and holding each other back creates just as much negative publicity, something that Stern does not need anymore.
For the record, I am down for players to come in with doo-rags, sport a Dolphins jersey, and clearing the bench to start a brawl.
NOW DEAL YOU DUDES! The NBA is still a great thing.
I dunno about that.
I sense a lot of anti-NBA sentiment among casual sports fans. They feel it's rigged and sometimes it's hard to argue that. Shit like this does NOT help. Ratings are down this year, too.
Yeah I am really disappointed with the rigidity of the play. It just seems like the trend is to empower the refs and league officials over the players and coaches.
At the core of the argument, that is essentially what I said about the NBA when they placed the dress code, new ball, zero tolerance officiating, etc. Image, corporate sponsorship, high net worth individuals; it all ties in to the schemes of running a big business. I remember at the beginning of the season, #24 was really weird, now it seems normal to me.
All this shit would be peripheral to you, if your team was still in it.
NOW DEAL YOU DUDES.
We do, oh Scientiste.
I heard your handle was, too.
fo sho dawg.
haha. Not on some AI or Tim Hardaway shit, but yea it's decent.
My team dealt w/ two suspensions last year. Chill, B.
So did mine.
Watching NBA Playoffs on ESPN = David Sanborn
I kick myself for missing studio segments w/ Chuck and the rest of the crew.
absolutely on point
is there going to be video replay... this is not a foot on the line 3 or designated area offensive foul shit
step on to the court but do not get involved you get a heavy fine
get into an altercation off the bench you get game suspension
whats so hard about that
did anyone think about this
technical shit like this is ridiculous i mean hypothetically a guy could jump off his bench seat in frustration slipon a gatorade glass and stumble on to the court
doing this in the series is ridiculous
but if spurs struggle and suns (at home) run theor offence and are hot theis game could be close..even a victory
a beautiful series that did not need to be spoiled by such bullshit
PS
cosine on the jazz hatt (never was i more satisfied in archrival series..rodman head games leading to malone ejections, jordan final shots)
The suspension and subsequent "retirement" of Joey Crawford has let to this chaos?