Reply With Quote
Surprised there's no Mayflower comments in this thread yet (cover of darkness).
True. And because of that, we'll now have teams faking injuries again. Next time Pop wants to rest TD, TD will suddenly come down with something.
Surprised there's no Mayflower comments in this thread yet (cover of darkness).
Then, teams will have to put injured players on an injured list and force them to miss 5 games before returning, or whatever that old rule was.
Imagine if the Spurs had won that game --Stern might have punished them for failing to inform Miami ahead of time that the Spurs were going to run a 1-5 screen and roll on the weak side at 2:37 of the third. How dare they not give an opponent notice of that!!
He's really not liking the way the coaches in his league make decisions that win games. Along with his ham-handed efforts to justify a wholly unjustifiable fine and to make his office the final arbiter of certain coaching decisions, he's now calling the intentional fouling of players "ludicrous.". Somehow, that rule only ever needs serious reconsideration when the status quo threatens the chances of a team in purple and gold.
While true, that's something the Spurs couldn't have done that time in Miami. With 2 players already on the inactive list (Jack and Khawi), the Spurs could only place one more there, and then would need pre-clearance from the league to place a 4th.
Obviously, the Spurs could've just had them all in uniform and not play them. Injury or not, there's no rule against that.
Perhaps, though the Commissioner can be read (I think) to suggest that if a team were to try that, it should seek approval and that approval would be unlikely and that ignoring the league's insistence that those guys play would bring reprisals.
There's no rule regarding "injured" players having to be in uniform. The Spurs could have had 6 "injured" players in street clothes and still be within the rules.
The rule you're sighting regarding the 4th player on the inactive list is regarding being able to sign a 16th player.
It's also interesting to see Stern trying to refute the gist of Woj's column last Friday by disclaiming anything personal between the league and Pop.
Well, what I mean is on the Inactive List, which is where teams are supposed to place "injured" players. The limit is 3 without consulting the league. A 4th can be added after consulting with the league. We were discussing this with Mel_13 on the other, larger, penalty thread. (salary cap faq on that here).
You're correct they don't have to be in uniform though. The other questions would be: do they need to even be in the building?
Great point. Stern definitely read that article
fck the jew, who wins championships in december? does the nba hand out championships in december?
It's not about championships for Stern at this point. It's about money and league good, fans as well needs to be satisfied along with tv stations who are showing the stars.
I was typing my post related to the topic but then decided to delete it. I just remembered that it is about an old dumb greedy human being and that there is no point to react.
Pop treats member of Spurs as players and not peasants.
It's just another one of the league office's asinine thought processes.
One last thought about the troubling aspects of Stern's response(s) to this: by his statements, I think Stern has all but said that fans should only be interested in his league for the stars or superstars -- if they're not there, he seems to think that his game is either uninteresting or unwatchable. It may be true, particularly early in the regular season, but that's a pretty breathtaking admission by a league commissioner.
"pretty breathtaking admission by a league commissioner"
it's so stupid you have to wonder how an intelligent man, a ing lawyer even, can make it. The answer is that NBA had sold that game to TNT and its advertisers for probably premium rates. It's all about the $$$, not about the fans or the game.
only visit?
someone call that fool and tell him the spurs will be there two more times for the finals
Look at this Stern quote, and think about it:
That's the point. . .there isn't ever a reason to fine a team 250k for resting players. The NBA doesn't pay the players, the teams do. The guys writing the paycheck have say in how they use their guys, not the league who doesn't even pay them!Maybe it's my mistake not to think that injury and illness when you're secreting someone away should also include deciding to move them out," Stern said. "So in all of the cir stances, I thought that if we didn't do something this time, there would never be a reason to do it.
Maybe the league needs to start paying team owners' yearly stipends for paying for the players the NBA is showcasing and making money off of, because after all, now they're telling them how to run their teams and fining them for doing it "wrong".
lol, seriously. Green was the only player under 30 who got sent home, and his hamstring is hurt.
The man who said "Lakers vs Lakers" set the bar pretty high for stupid.
The ruling puts the league in a serious bind. Suppose Pop or some coach plays his stars for the opening tip and then pulls them. Or plays them a couple of minutes in both halfs?
Are we going to see a "Minutes Czar" handing out fines based on minutes played by stars, superstars, waning stars, almost stars, best on the team but not stars?
Is he wrong though? I mean, we all know the Spurs love to play a different brand of basketball and what not, but would the Spurs still exist without the David Robinsons or Tim Duncans of the world?
Perhaps he's not. But he's just expressly marginalized every team that doesn't have a superstar, suggesting (again, as I read his statement) that people won't or shouldn't watch games without superstars.
I mean, if I own the Sacramento Kings or the Charlotte Bobcats, I know my team is bad but I don't need the commissioner of my league -- the guy who works for me to further my interests -- telling people that my bad team isn't even worth watching because I don't have a star-studded roster.
really the arguments stern points out, are just plain re ed and offensive.
Stern's bald-faced hypocrisy appears to have no limits. It's refreshing to see that most thoughtful observers realize how completely wrong he's been in this whole episode.
In a league of superstars, I'm not sure why David Stern fined the Spurs. All the superstars the fans paid to see actually played.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions