OK, I promise I’ll stop a) doing my impersonation of Bill Simmons with the endless string of NBA columns which get tedious after a while and b) talking about this topic after I get this one last post off my chest.
No matter what one thinks of Isiah’s skills as a general manager, coach, or human being, I really don’t understand why ESPN’s Chris Sheridan is arguing that Zeke should’ve been suspended for his role in Saturday’s brawl. While one can certainly assume that the flagrant foul was pre-meditated and not simply a hard foul in the heat of battle, no one can prove that Isiah explicitly ordered Mardy Collins’ hack on JR Smith.
What’s more curious about Sheridan’s argument are in his final three paragraphs:
“This one reeks of Stern doing a favor for Dolan, heaping all the blame on the players and letting Thomas off without even so much as a public scolding.
All in all, it was a bad weekend for the NBA and a bad Monday for Stern. We’ve come to expect him to be a disciplinarian when circumstances call for it, but we expect him to be evenhanded.
By letting Thomas off, Stern came off as more disingenuous than disciplinarian, and that's as big a disappointment as the brawl itself.”
First of all, why would anyone feel that David Stern would owe James Dolan a favor? Unlike in Major League Baseball, where Bud Selig owes his job to several of his fellow owners (whom he relishes in repaying time and again), I can’t recall one time where Commissioner Stern ever kowtowed to the whims of this owner or that. If someone can give me an example where Stern showed blatant favoritism, I’m all ears.
Second, what would be in it for Stern to spare Isiah Thomas and James Dolan, two lightning-rods of criticism among fans and media pundits alike? League business would not be furthered by keeping Thomas clean of this affair and Sheridan, who should know better than anyone, that the NBA has made it a point to always further league business first. Image is everything, after all.
Why do I get the feeling that Sheridan simply has an ax to grind here, and that none of his whining is rooted in any legitimacy. Furthermore, if Nate Robinson was suspended for actually instigating a fight – Collins and Smith appeared to be merely jawing at eachother and punches may not have been thrown without Robinson’s involvement – then Robinson’s role as main troublemaker would partially exonerate Isiah as puppet master.
No matter what one thinks of Isiah’s skills as a general manager, coach, or human being, I really don’t understand why ESPN’s Chris Sheridan is arguing that Zeke should’ve been suspended for his role in Saturday’s brawl. While one can certainly assume that the flagrant foul was pre-meditated and not simply a hard foul in the heat of battle, no one can prove that Isiah explicitly ordered Mardy Collins’ hack on JR Smith.
What’s more curious about Sheridan’s argument are in his final three paragraphs:
“This one reeks of Stern doing a favor for Dolan, heaping all the blame on the players and letting Thomas off without even so much as a public scolding.
All in all, it was a bad weekend for the NBA and a bad Monday for Stern. We’ve come to expect him to be a disciplinarian when circumstances call for it, but we expect him to be evenhanded.
By letting Thomas off, Stern came off as more disingenuous than disciplinarian, and that's as big a disappointment as the brawl itself.”
First of all, why would anyone feel that David Stern would owe James Dolan a favor? Unlike in Major League Baseball, where Bud Selig owes his job to several of his fellow owners (whom he relishes in repaying time and again), I can’t recall one time where Commissioner Stern ever kowtowed to the whims of this owner or that. If someone can give me an example where Stern showed blatant favoritism, I’m all ears.
Second, what would be in it for Stern to spare Isiah Thomas and James Dolan, two lightning-rods of criticism among fans and media pundits alike? League business would not be furthered by keeping Thomas clean of this affair and Sheridan, who should know better than anyone, that the NBA has made it a point to always further league business first. Image is everything, after all.
Why do I get the feeling that Sheridan simply has an ax to grind here, and that none of his whining is rooted in any legitimacy. Furthermore, if Nate Robinson was suspended for actually instigating a fight – Collins and Smith appeared to be merely jawing at eachother and punches may not have been thrown without Robinson’s involvement – then Robinson’s role as main troublemaker would partially exonerate Isiah as puppet master.
No comments:
Post a Comment