duncan228
10-27-2007, 10:44 PM
http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/10433703
Running NBA is rough job but somebody has to do it
By Tony Mejia
David Stern is grumpy.
He opened up his annual preseason media teleconference by prefacing that he planned to "be brief and upbeat at the beginning and open it up to long and downbeat questions."
In other words, he got to the good stuff first, knowing there would be a lot of annoying issues he'd have to answer for and later went on to acknowledge that this was certainly an "interesting" time with lots of interesting issues facing his NBA.
Commissioner Stern, I don't want your job. Your salary, definitely, but you can keep your headaches. CBSSports.com is forcing it down my throat.
Your job, not the salary.
This is a commissioner-for-a-day column, which understandably puts me at a disadvantage considering Rome wasn't built in a day and that would be perceived an easier gig than fixing the NBA at the present moment. Still, I'll give it a go. Tips are appreciated.
Issue No. 1: Consistency in fairness
Phoenix fans have to be livid about hearing that referees will not be disciplined over participating in an array of gambling activities ranging from entering casinos to participating in lotteries and poker games because that rule was deemed archaic and unfair. L-I-V-I-D.
I'm kind of upset about it myself, because I backed the ruling that came down from the league office last May suspending Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw for leaving the bench during an altercation of Game 5 of the Western Conference semis. Rules are rules, I wrote, even though it was unfair that guys could just step up off the bench and miss a huge game. They went by the letter of the law, though. Hands were tied. There was a skirmish going on and guys stood up, so they were suspended. A few days prior, guys stood up, but there was no skirmish going on, so nothing happened. The letter of the law was followed.
Considering the letter of the law wasn't followed by 100 percent of NBA refs in staying away from gambling and there won't even be a slap on the wrist to follow, I'd say I was wrong back then.
It made sense to adhere to public outcry and change a rule on the spot simply because it was the right thing to do, because that's what Stern just stepped in and decided as far as his referees are concerned. He's the CEO. Overruling decisions in the interest of common sense should be part of the job description.
Sure, it's shady to change rules as you go along, but we're not advocating four steps on a traveling call midway through a game, or even re-seeding midway through the playoffs just because there is a major upset, as some wanted to do to Golden State last year. We're talking about just doing what seems right. Diaw and Stoudemire stood up. They didn't fan the flames of anything like J.R. Smith, Carmelo Anthony and Nate Robinson did in the Knicks/Nuggets brawl after Smith got nailed by Mardy Collins. They were two different things.
Stern should've known better, but I respected his rigidity. Now that he's shown he's got room to bend, I hate that decision. Unlike many, I like Stern. He wins me over with comments like these:
"There's an entire set of issues that we have to deal with respect to gambling and the like. Let's not conflate that with issues about the competence of our officials or not. You can have what opinions you may have on that. But I choose to separate criminal conduct, just as I don't start my phone calls with you asking about Jayson Blair and how it affects your reputation as a reporter or the like."
That's proactive defense, people. If he were in the NFL, he'd be like Buddy Ryan running the '85 Bears. He swarms.
But let me see if I follow his equation right: Suns/Spurs is to Nuggets/Knicks as Donaghy is to Blair? The latter analogy, I get. The former, the NBA didn't. Consistency in fairness. That's what the people want.
Issue No. 2: Refereeing
The people want new refs. I'm not going to give them. Never said I was entirely in the business of making friends here. Stern is correct in his assessment that his referees face a tough job and do it rather well. Fans in cities where Steve Javie and Bennett Salvatore need personal bodyguards might disagree, but everyone is getting a clean slate with me.
Donaghy's actions have nothing to do with the fact that the people hate referees and see things their own way. Fans have been complaining about the way refs call games since cavemen put on striped shirts. It's a contact sport and the league's people do as good a job as any. Ol' Buddy in Manhattan says the NBA "will be much more forthcoming with respect to telling the world when our referees make a mistake. That will be often. We'll probably keep it until important situations, but it will be often because only 92 percent of our calls are correct. We have these things called humans making the calls."
Sorry, that's not enough. People already know when referees make big mistakes. It's that c-word, consistency, that bothers everyone. Consistently missing little calls. Consistently issuing technical fouls just because you have a short temper. There's one thing to restore order and quite another to be an ass about it.
You have frames of every single call. Put them on NBA.com. Let everyone see for themselves who ranks near the bottom of the accuracy rankings, and then let us vote them off the island. The Joey Crawford incident was actually a step in the right direction, because it showed that the zebras will be held accountable for stepping out of line, but what would've happened had that incident not occurred in a high-profile, nationally televised game? Would it have been swept under the carpet? Not in my league.
You have to level the playing field between coaches, players and referees and strike a delicate balance between letting them running the game without ruining the game. But, like I said, they've earned their stripes and climbed the ranks to get to this point, so I'm keeping all of them and basing their merits from here on out.
It's year one, A.D.
In the post-Donaghy era, my referees talk to the media. They have to answer questions the same way coaches and players do. If they step out of line and call each other out, acting unprofessionally and what not, they get fined, but they live to call games another day. At least then, everyone will know where they're coming from. These things called humans making calls should be treated like just that.
Issue No. 3: Re-seeding
You get no re-seeding, whiners.
The entire game of basketball grew in popularity on upsets and brackets. You seed teams Nos. 1-8, based on records and you let them go at it. If the top three records in the Western Conference come out of the same state in the Southwest Division, you seed them Nos. 1-2-3.
If the Warriors oust the Mavericks again, they move on and play whoever Dallas would've played, because they've earned that right. No arguments.
K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, Stern.
Issue No. 4: Sleepless in Seattle... Sacramento... Orlando
Teams are going to need new arenas and people aren't going to want to pay for them. City leaders must represent said people and owners are interested in representing their bottom line. This will never change, so I'm going for my, "I'm Paul and that's between y'all," defense that Stern is currently using as far as the Sonics are concerned. If folks in Seattle are dead set against using city money to build the team a new arena to keep it in place, they lose the team. If owner Clay Bennett wants to break the lease so he doesn't lose money through 2010, he can fight that battle, but it's on him if he loses. Understanding that it hurts my league to lose money, I have to cite the "my rules are the rules/fairness defense" and declare that we have to bite the bullet on this one, boys. If, like they did in Sacramento and Orlando, an agreement can be reached, teams stay put and I come visit their new buildings with a big smile on my face.
Issue No. 5: Sexual Harassment in New York
Again, I'd love to pull the, "What's this got to do with me?" clause, but understanding that goody-goody Roger Goodell is suspending everyone who crosses the line in the NFL and would make me look bad if I do nothing, I'd come up with some arbitrary inflated figure to fine the Knicks and set an example for everyone else, while Isiah Thomas, if convicted would get some sort of reasonable suspension, again, to set a precedent. I'd also be pulling this "due process" card Stern is relying on before he makes a judgment, if only in the hopes that the Knicks fire their president/coach so I don't have to do anything.
Maybe this commissioner gig isn't so hard, after all. Wouldn't want it, though. The little problems that arise paint you into unenviable corners that are as grating as answering user feedback. Stern can have it.
That said, he can call on me to consult at any time -- for a fee.
Running NBA is rough job but somebody has to do it
By Tony Mejia
David Stern is grumpy.
He opened up his annual preseason media teleconference by prefacing that he planned to "be brief and upbeat at the beginning and open it up to long and downbeat questions."
In other words, he got to the good stuff first, knowing there would be a lot of annoying issues he'd have to answer for and later went on to acknowledge that this was certainly an "interesting" time with lots of interesting issues facing his NBA.
Commissioner Stern, I don't want your job. Your salary, definitely, but you can keep your headaches. CBSSports.com is forcing it down my throat.
Your job, not the salary.
This is a commissioner-for-a-day column, which understandably puts me at a disadvantage considering Rome wasn't built in a day and that would be perceived an easier gig than fixing the NBA at the present moment. Still, I'll give it a go. Tips are appreciated.
Issue No. 1: Consistency in fairness
Phoenix fans have to be livid about hearing that referees will not be disciplined over participating in an array of gambling activities ranging from entering casinos to participating in lotteries and poker games because that rule was deemed archaic and unfair. L-I-V-I-D.
I'm kind of upset about it myself, because I backed the ruling that came down from the league office last May suspending Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw for leaving the bench during an altercation of Game 5 of the Western Conference semis. Rules are rules, I wrote, even though it was unfair that guys could just step up off the bench and miss a huge game. They went by the letter of the law, though. Hands were tied. There was a skirmish going on and guys stood up, so they were suspended. A few days prior, guys stood up, but there was no skirmish going on, so nothing happened. The letter of the law was followed.
Considering the letter of the law wasn't followed by 100 percent of NBA refs in staying away from gambling and there won't even be a slap on the wrist to follow, I'd say I was wrong back then.
It made sense to adhere to public outcry and change a rule on the spot simply because it was the right thing to do, because that's what Stern just stepped in and decided as far as his referees are concerned. He's the CEO. Overruling decisions in the interest of common sense should be part of the job description.
Sure, it's shady to change rules as you go along, but we're not advocating four steps on a traveling call midway through a game, or even re-seeding midway through the playoffs just because there is a major upset, as some wanted to do to Golden State last year. We're talking about just doing what seems right. Diaw and Stoudemire stood up. They didn't fan the flames of anything like J.R. Smith, Carmelo Anthony and Nate Robinson did in the Knicks/Nuggets brawl after Smith got nailed by Mardy Collins. They were two different things.
Stern should've known better, but I respected his rigidity. Now that he's shown he's got room to bend, I hate that decision. Unlike many, I like Stern. He wins me over with comments like these:
"There's an entire set of issues that we have to deal with respect to gambling and the like. Let's not conflate that with issues about the competence of our officials or not. You can have what opinions you may have on that. But I choose to separate criminal conduct, just as I don't start my phone calls with you asking about Jayson Blair and how it affects your reputation as a reporter or the like."
That's proactive defense, people. If he were in the NFL, he'd be like Buddy Ryan running the '85 Bears. He swarms.
But let me see if I follow his equation right: Suns/Spurs is to Nuggets/Knicks as Donaghy is to Blair? The latter analogy, I get. The former, the NBA didn't. Consistency in fairness. That's what the people want.
Issue No. 2: Refereeing
The people want new refs. I'm not going to give them. Never said I was entirely in the business of making friends here. Stern is correct in his assessment that his referees face a tough job and do it rather well. Fans in cities where Steve Javie and Bennett Salvatore need personal bodyguards might disagree, but everyone is getting a clean slate with me.
Donaghy's actions have nothing to do with the fact that the people hate referees and see things their own way. Fans have been complaining about the way refs call games since cavemen put on striped shirts. It's a contact sport and the league's people do as good a job as any. Ol' Buddy in Manhattan says the NBA "will be much more forthcoming with respect to telling the world when our referees make a mistake. That will be often. We'll probably keep it until important situations, but it will be often because only 92 percent of our calls are correct. We have these things called humans making the calls."
Sorry, that's not enough. People already know when referees make big mistakes. It's that c-word, consistency, that bothers everyone. Consistently missing little calls. Consistently issuing technical fouls just because you have a short temper. There's one thing to restore order and quite another to be an ass about it.
You have frames of every single call. Put them on NBA.com. Let everyone see for themselves who ranks near the bottom of the accuracy rankings, and then let us vote them off the island. The Joey Crawford incident was actually a step in the right direction, because it showed that the zebras will be held accountable for stepping out of line, but what would've happened had that incident not occurred in a high-profile, nationally televised game? Would it have been swept under the carpet? Not in my league.
You have to level the playing field between coaches, players and referees and strike a delicate balance between letting them running the game without ruining the game. But, like I said, they've earned their stripes and climbed the ranks to get to this point, so I'm keeping all of them and basing their merits from here on out.
It's year one, A.D.
In the post-Donaghy era, my referees talk to the media. They have to answer questions the same way coaches and players do. If they step out of line and call each other out, acting unprofessionally and what not, they get fined, but they live to call games another day. At least then, everyone will know where they're coming from. These things called humans making calls should be treated like just that.
Issue No. 3: Re-seeding
You get no re-seeding, whiners.
The entire game of basketball grew in popularity on upsets and brackets. You seed teams Nos. 1-8, based on records and you let them go at it. If the top three records in the Western Conference come out of the same state in the Southwest Division, you seed them Nos. 1-2-3.
If the Warriors oust the Mavericks again, they move on and play whoever Dallas would've played, because they've earned that right. No arguments.
K.I.S.S. Keep it simple, Stern.
Issue No. 4: Sleepless in Seattle... Sacramento... Orlando
Teams are going to need new arenas and people aren't going to want to pay for them. City leaders must represent said people and owners are interested in representing their bottom line. This will never change, so I'm going for my, "I'm Paul and that's between y'all," defense that Stern is currently using as far as the Sonics are concerned. If folks in Seattle are dead set against using city money to build the team a new arena to keep it in place, they lose the team. If owner Clay Bennett wants to break the lease so he doesn't lose money through 2010, he can fight that battle, but it's on him if he loses. Understanding that it hurts my league to lose money, I have to cite the "my rules are the rules/fairness defense" and declare that we have to bite the bullet on this one, boys. If, like they did in Sacramento and Orlando, an agreement can be reached, teams stay put and I come visit their new buildings with a big smile on my face.
Issue No. 5: Sexual Harassment in New York
Again, I'd love to pull the, "What's this got to do with me?" clause, but understanding that goody-goody Roger Goodell is suspending everyone who crosses the line in the NFL and would make me look bad if I do nothing, I'd come up with some arbitrary inflated figure to fine the Knicks and set an example for everyone else, while Isiah Thomas, if convicted would get some sort of reasonable suspension, again, to set a precedent. I'd also be pulling this "due process" card Stern is relying on before he makes a judgment, if only in the hopes that the Knicks fire their president/coach so I don't have to do anything.
Maybe this commissioner gig isn't so hard, after all. Wouldn't want it, though. The little problems that arise paint you into unenviable corners that are as grating as answering user feedback. Stern can have it.
That said, he can call on me to consult at any time -- for a fee.