David Stern Goes Off on Pop, Promises "Substantial Sanctions"

[Mugen]

Lockout, veto CP3 trade, rigging the NBA draft, Substantial Sanctions.....


Vince McMahon is going all out in his farewell tour, tbh.

[spurraider21]

Next time Pop wants to sit the big 3 he should list all of them with a pinky bruise

[Mr. Body]

Suspending Pop or a fine would not be substantial. Draft picks would be going too far.

I could see suspending the players as in " if they were so tired, they can stay home for a couple of weeks and get some rest". That would really penalize the team.

How would he suspend the players? He's pissed the top players didn't play, so... he makes it so they don't play more?

And how could he fine the players? It wasn't their decision; he'd be encouraging insubordination over their coach's desires.

He could potentially fine the coach. But then the owner of the team would probably get pissed off for the punishment against the coach for doing what he's paid to do - coach - not to mention what he was trying to do was protect the lasting health of his players.

If I'm David Stern, I stay awake tonight for a very long time because I've stuck my foot in my mouth. If I don't do anything, I've made myself look stupid. If I do something, I look like an overreaching buffoon AND and tyrant.

Just not a good night for old Stern there.

[Mugen]

[HI-FI]

serious though, whenever he retires and LA builds it's 10 foot statue outside Staples for the 5 foot dude, he should consider driving off a cliff.

[jestersmash]

Adam Silver has already set a precedent and plenty of other teams (Spurs included) have pulled this trick in the past without fines or sanctions.

There's absolutely no way Stern can punish the Spurs for this game. Maybe this game cons uted the "straw that broke the camel's back" and Stern will implement some inevitably unenforceable rule that you can't rest stars just because they're tired, but that's it.

The league has set a clear precedent that resting stars is O.K. and "under the discretion of the [coaching staff]" (I don't remember Silver's exact words). If Stern wants to make this a fine-able offense, then fine, but he can't retroactively punish the Spurs after implementing it.

[DPG21920]

Again, any sanction, even minor, I would expect the Spurs to fight.

[Mel_13]

Again, any sanction, even minor, I would expect the Spurs to fight.

Actually, if he just slaps them on the wrist after promising "substantial sanctions", I believe the Spurs will just write the check and consider it a victory for the way they do business.

[024]

stern will end up having his revenge. 2013 WCSF, grizzlies vs the spurs, game 7. spurs up 10 with five minutes left. cue the grizzlies parade to the free throw line and the grizzlies pull out a victory and head to the WCF.

[jestersmash]

Actually, if he just slaps them on the wrist after promising "substantial sanctions", I believe the Spurs will just write the check and consider it a victory for the way they do business.

Stern respects Holt too much to make the Spurs organization as a whole (and therefore Holt) write a check or pay a fine.

[DPG21920]

Perhaps - but there is no reason to believe what they did is an offense that deserves any sort of ramifications. If you allow a sanction to happen, even if minor, you open the door to further penalties down the road.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Actually, if he just slaps them on the wrist after promising "substantial sanctions", I believe the Spurs will just write the check and consider it a victory for the way they do business.

There is nothing in the rules or in precedent that calls for even a slap on the wrist. If the Commissioner does anything "suo motu" without rule validation, it would be a tight slap on the NBA and a great dawn for conspiracy theorists who have long argued about undue influence of the "big market" on the NBA's decision making.

My guess is that David Stern will eat up his threat and move on .

[jestersmash]

Here's the term I was looking for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "from after the action" or "after the fact"), also called a retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.

Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Cons ution.


Edit:

Silver's exact quote about strategic resting of stars: “The strategic resting of particular players on particular nights is within the discretion of the teams. And Gregg Popovich in particular is probably the last coach that I would second-guess.”

[Mr. Body]

Aren't there pretty specific legal definitions for the term 'sanctions'? Stern is a lawyer first, second, and third (mixed with a businessman).

A sanction implies a restriction of future action or the removal of rights and permissions.

I think Stern's lawyerliness made sure he said that word. A punishment is not as likely - as many have pointed out, what was the violation? But we may see strong rules changes, whatever they may be.

[Boomersgold]

As someone said earlier, we should keep Mills, Neal, De Colo, Splitter and Diaw as our starters from now on, but take them out after 2 minutes in the first quarter. That could be our way of saying F U to Stern.

[Mel_13]

There is nothing in the rules or in precedent that calls for even a slap on the wrist. If the Commissioner does anything "suo motu" without rule validation, it would be a tight slap on the NBA and a great dawn for conspiracy theorists who have long argued about undue influence of the "big market" on the NBA's decision making.

My guess is that David Stern will eat up his threat and move on .

I agree that he has no grounds for any penalties, but he has promised them in a very public way. If the "substantial sanctions" turn into a slap on the wrist, then I believe that the Spurs will allow Stern to exit the situation in that way. Just my opinion.

[DPG21920]

I can't wait for the Woj article about this either way

[thispego]

Stern seems to be missing the point of the NBA: it's a sport. Maybe he should be promoting the love of watching the game, no matter who is on the court. What happened tonight was a great game, probably a lot better than people thought. What pop did was something I was hoping he would do in the first place because Saturday is going to be TOUGH. Props to pop and the Spurs supporting cast, games like this is how we are going to get deep again like last year. We may have lost but I guarantee a couple more "no big three" games are gonna help. 2014 can't get here any sooner.

this

stern will end up having his revenge. 2013 WCSF, grizzlies vs the spurs, game 7. spurs up 10 with five minutes left. cue the grizzlies parade to the free throw line and the grizzlies pull out a victory and head to the WCF.

and this

[jestersmash]

Aren't there pretty specific legal definitions for the term 'sanctions'? Stern is a lawyer first, second, and third (mixed with a businessman).

A sanction implies a restriction of future action or the removal of rights and permissions.

I think Stern's lawyerliness made sure he said that word. A punishment is not as likely - as many have pointed out, what was the violation? But we may see strong rules changes, whatever they may be.

Is this right? If this is correct, this makes a whole lot more sense.

There's certainly no way Stern can punish the Spurs or Popovich individually for this incident.

[Spursfanfromafar]

I agree that he has no grounds for any penalties, but he has promised them in a very public way. If the "substantial sanctions" turn into a slap on the wrist, then I believe that the Spurs will allow Stern to exit the situation in that way. Just my opinion.

Knowing the low key Spurs and their focus on the big picture, your opinion might just be right. I just hope that David Stern realises the folly of his "sanction" comment and emulates the Spurs in that same reasoning.

[tuncaboylu]

That mother er is talking . Wasn't Game 6 in last year's western finals a sanction for Spurs, while they were trying to root Durant-Lebron final?

[TampaDude]

Here's the term I was looking for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "from after the action" or "after the fact"), also called a retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law.

Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Cons ution.


Edit:

Silver's exact quote about strategic resting of stars: “The strategic resting of particular players on particular nights is within the discretion of the teams. And Gregg Popovich in particular is probably the last coach that I would second-guess.”

That rule doesn't apply to the NBA, though. Still, if Stern singled out the Spurs or pulled some stupid non-existent rule out of his ass, he'd surely end up in court over it, and would look like a whiny baby. It's a lose-lose for Stern. The smartest thing for Stern to do is just shut up and move on.

[KaiRMD1]

That mother er is talking . Wasn't Game 6 in las year's western finals is a sanction for Spurs, while they were trying to root Durant-Lebron final?

That was our sanction for sitting the big three out of the last two and Pop missing those games too. Every season we get a sanction I guess.

[jestersmash]

That rule doesn't apply to the NBA, though. Still, if Stern singled out the Spurs or pulled some stupid non-existent rule out of his ass, he'd surely end up in court over it, and would look like a whiny baby. It's a lose-lose for Stern. The smartest thing for Stern to do is just shut up and move on.

Why does it not apply to the NBA?

Say Stern creates a new rule within the NBA that says coaches can be punished by a fine if they rest otherwise "healthy" (he'll have to define this) stars on January 1, 2013.

Next, Stern decides to punish Popovich under this 2013 rule for something Popovich did on November 29, 2012.

Are you saying that Popovich couldn't - in principle - successfully sue the league under the precept that he was punished by an ex-post facto law?

I mean, maybe nba players/owners/coaches waived their cons utional rights for the right to play in the league. I'm not sure. I'm just genuinely curious.

[Mr. Body]

Is this right? If this is correct, this makes a whole lot more sense.

There's certainly no way Stern can punish the Spurs or Popovich individually for this incident.

Well, I don't know for certain, but that's my guess. I think Stern knows that trying to do anything about this incident ex post facto, as you said, opens up a bad can of worms. Acknowledging a problem and changing the rules going forward is the smarter thing to do. That it was a close game makes this easier.