Reply With Quote
That would be awesome.I will just say that Stu Jackson may have written his ticket out of the NBA league office with this one. Time will tell.
I told the readers on this forum, well in advance of it being released, that there was video from a different camera that showed that Amare Stoudamire was lying when he said that Bruce Bowen had kicked him during a playoff game. I also told you that there were a large number of NBA refs who had violated the league's gambling policy, long before Stern [sort of] admitted it. (You still haven't heard the whole story on that one.) I can tell you that I have this next bit from what I consider a very reliable source. You can believe it or not, I really don't care. For those that don't care to read this whole thing, I will just say that Stu Jackson may have written his ticket out of the NBA league office with this one. Time will tell.
There is a video clip from the opposite (bench) side of the court that shows what really happened on the floor between Bowen and Chris Paul. And that clip makes Bowen's suspension look just about as ridiculous as Joey Crawford ejecting Duncan for laughing last year. Stu Jackson was made aware of the video, but made his mind up without seeing it. (Maybe even refusing to look at it?) Worse than that, he took at least one call from an official with another Western Conference team that influenced his decision to suspend Bowen. (Read that to mean that someone called Stu to complain about Bowen, and he agreed that Bruce has "a history".) That comment was apparently made before a proper review of the game film was even made.
In an interview from a couple of years ago, "Mr. Jackson, the NBA executive in charge of discipline, says: "We evaluate each case individually based upon the incident itself, based upon the player, whether he's had any prior offense, and finally on the severity of the act." It looks like Stuey decided that Bowen's priors were enough to warrant a suspension, even though the act clearly wasn't sufficient. The question is, why was he listening to representative(s) from a team not involved in the game?
For those not familiar with the procedure, Bowen has the right to appeal the ruling after the end of the season. He may very well get all, or part of his money back. But nothing will make up for missing the game - he will serve that suspension without any possibility of appeal. In this incredibly tight Western Conference race, that could determine the outcome of the season.
During the investigation of the referee gambling scandal it came to light that Stu Jackson was, at the very best, incompetent. You can take your pick about whether he ignored, intentionally ignored, or covered up some known problems with referees around the league. At the beginning of the season, David Stern announced that Jackson was being demoted - although he claimed that his role was being "altered" and "expanded". The truth is, Jackson's old job was split between two people, and Jackson will no longer have anything to do with referees. Instead, he is dealling more with the international aspects of the league. Some think that he will either accept the role of VP of International Relations, or get pushed out altogether. Regardless of what it is called, Jackson was demoted, and he is apparently none to happy about it.
What, you may ask, does that have to do with Bowen's suspension? I'll admit that I didn't put it together. But it seems that some of Pop's comments about the Pau Gasol trade may have been directed towards Jackson for approving the deal. (Was Stuey making brownie points for an eventual move back to team management?) Regardless of Pop's intent, it seems that Jackson was none too happy with his comments about the Gasol trade.
When this season is over, and Bowen gets to appeal his suspension, he is going to get his money back. (But that will be a closed-door decision.) And Jackson's decision is going to be reviewed as well. From what I understand, the video evidence makes the suspension, and Stu Jackson, look like a joke. Unless it looks like payback... in which case it may make Stuey look like the ex-VP of Basketball Operations. He has made the league, and Stern, look like an idiot once already. This could be his swan song.
For those of you in doubt, compare what Bruce did to the other 1-game suspensions in the past few seasons. Jackson had the ability to hand down a fine, if he saw fit. But the suspension is completely out of line for the contact that occurred.
The last thing I am interested in is comments from the mul ude of trolls on this board lately. If the Spurs fans have doubts that's understandable. The main reason I posted this was to get word out about the other video. (Don't you wonder why you haven't seen anything from the bench side of the court?) Maybe Bowen can save part or all of the $300K the suspension would cost him. Anything I have said here would be impossible to back up without costing a job or two - and maybe not even then. Call it fiction... but keep an eye on Stuey in the near future. I really think he's cooked.
That would be awesome.I will just say that Stu Jackson may have written his ticket out of the NBA league office with this one. Time will tell.
Thanks for the post. But we know about the videos with other angles. The one from the Spurs broadcast clearly shows that Bowen didn't do much and was hit in the balls by Paul. We put the clip of it up on YouTube.The main reason I posted this was to get word out about the other video.
Amen
do you have a link to it Kori? i haven't seen it
Watch the slow motion part.
Nice write-up. If the allegations are true that it's a sort of "F-U" to Pop, then Stu absolutely deserves to be canned. He's a tool.
Just curious, though, where the $300K comes from? I was under the impression that he would lose his pro-rated salary for one game, which would come out to around $50,304. I haven't heard anything about a fine also being handed down, but I'm sure it isn't in the range of $250K!
Stu Jackson was an affirmative action hire. He couldn't find his ass with both hands, a magnifying glass, and a map. I've been following the NBA for 25+ years, and he's the worst hire into that position, ever.
Stu is a freaking tool! He absolutely deserves to be canned regardless if what you say is true.
I'm thinking he ended up getting suspended for the ac ulation of all the past incidents.
The only ulative thing you're supposed to be suspended for is flagrants, and that resets every year. If Stu Jackson suspended him for his rep, he NEEDS to be fired immediately, if not sooner.
This just in...Stern fires Jackson and orders tonight's game between the Pistons and Spurs to be replayed...Bowen to start for the Spurs in the do-over...
I didnt say that Stu doesnt suck, i just said that bowen's rep has caught up to him. I dont even think he's dirty, i just think he frustrates players and they complain and give him a bad image. And now everyone is buying into it.
Scully: Is it another government cover up, Moulder?
Moulder: I want to BELIEVE.
Seriously -- The whole thing smells rotten, especially in light of the above video. I don't know all about retaliation over implied interpretations of Pop's comments on the gasol trade. BUT I can definitely agree that stuj is worse than incompetent. He's a downright blowhard.
That's a good point. I took the number right off of a news story, and didn't even question it. (A nice way of saying I didn't stop and think.) Looks like they have corrected it. Now they say $37,000.
I love the way Bruce raises HIS HANDS as he steps on Paul WITH HIS FEET to get away from him.
"Don't watch my feet, watch my hands"
Stu is gone. Mark my words. He will regret what he did.
I didn't say it was a cover up. I think before it's over, Stuey may wish he could cover it up.
The parts of the story I feel pretty solid about are:
1. Jackson listened to the whining of another team's GM, rather than reviewing the game film like he should.
2. He made up his mind before seeing all the camera angles, based on Bowen's "history".
3. There is video from the bench side of the court that wasn't used to make the decision. That video is conclusive enough that it makes the suspension a joke. And anyone who sees it (including David Stern) will understand that Stuey blew the call.
The rest is specualtion and extrapolation:
1. I'm pretty sure that Pop was more upset about the Gasol trade than any "normal" trade, and it has something to do with Stu Jackson. I can't think of many things that would fit that mold.
2. Jackson has to be aware that Pop's comments ultimately point his direction. I wouldn't expect him to be happy about that.
3. Jackson screwed up with the referee debacle. Stern found out about it, and Stuey's duties were "adjusted" so that he no longer has anything to do with referees.
4. I don't think Stern will tolerate another screw-up from Jackson that makes the league look stupid. Allowing the Gasol trade is just about enough to qualify. Suspending a player for no reason, and in a way that even looks like it could be payback? That might be enough to finish him off.
If you saw Pop's comment that the incident didn't measure up to the kinds of contact that normally draw suspensions, you would be tempted to read between the lines and ask, "Why?" What would make Stu Jackson hand down a suspension for something that didn't warrent it? Popovich and the Spurs organization are usually pretty tight-lipped.
You remember when Pop told Steve Kerr that he was "wearing too many hats"? It was a small comment, but there was a whole lot behind it. I don't think Pop would have said anything about the Gasol trade unless there was more to the story, either. And based on the way he phrased his comment about Bowen's suspension, I think he believes there is more to this story too.
BTW... ask yourself what GM in the league would call Stu Jackson about something Bowen (allegedly) did in a game against the Hornets.
Remember when he coached the Knicks? He was worse than Isiah
Sam Presti
Honestly, though, I've said Stu Jackson was a terrible hire from the beginning. I got blasted for saying it last year when he suspended Kobe and for saying it when he suspended Diaw and Amare.
His mis-applied the "letter of the law" in the WCSF last year, but what else can you expect from a moron?
OMG! That was the first time I have seen the video and Bruce didn't even touch him with his knee! Wow dude, the NBA hates the Spurs....
The NY Knicks homer should take a look at thatOMG! That was the first time I have seen the video and Bruce didn't even touch him with his knee! Wow dude, the NBA hates the Spurs....
Um...I'm gonna have to say Steve Kerr.
Doesn't he hate the Spurs now?
Whine.
Take the loss.
Move on.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
