Bynum suspended 5 games

G-Heel · Post #81 » by **G-Heel** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:32 am

Lets just hope he don't pull that bitch move again. I don't know how you just ram your elbow into someone body while they're in midair, 3 times. Next time he do that, 20 games minimum imo. Dwight pulled some craps when he's frustrated, but not to that point.

uncarved block · Post #82 » by **uncarved block** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:32 am

Wilford Brimley wrote:What if Barea had gotten injured?

Unfortunately he didnt

Heyvoon24 · Post #83 » by **Heyvoon24** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:32 am

Betta Bulleavit wrote:
Heyvoon24 wrote:5 games is the correct number of games given his past history of doing this before.

In terms of precident, I feel you are correct. However, in the real world, people that break the law repeatedly get sentenced harder each time. And in some cases, you get three strikes and you are out....literally.

They more than doubled his suspension he got for dropping Beasley (2 games). Expecting 20 games for that move is just not being rational.

jmb987 · Post #84 » by **jmb987** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:33 am

Betta Bulleavit wrote:
No, he isn't losing quadruple what I said was dropping the hammer. You might want to get the math right. To start, I didn't know that Bynum is actually earning almost $170,000 per game. But considering that he obviously is, 850,000 (5 x 170,000) + 25,000 (actual fine) + $200,000 (what I felt the fine should have been) = $1,125,000. So what he is losing is actually about 125,000 less than the minimum that I thought he should have gotten. Notice in my post above that I felt like he should have lost "a cool mil",
which he isn't. Just to clarify.

Well in your original post you didn't mention being suspended w/o pay. I assumed that you can be suspended but still get paid, and I tried looking up the rules on that, but couldn't find any info. Regardless, it was my mistake. I assumed you meant suspended + $200K fine, not suspended w/o pay + 200K fine.

Betta Bulleavit · Post #85 » by **Betta Bulleavit** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:36 am

Heyvoon24 wrote:
Betta Bulleavit wrote:
Heyvoon24 wrote:5 games is the correct number of games given his past history of doing this before.

In terms of precident, I feel you are correct. However, in the real world, people that break the law repeatedly get sentenced harder each time. And in some cases, you get three strikes and you are out....literally.

They more than doubled his suspension he got for dropping Beasley (2 games). Expecting 20 games for that move is just not being rational.

Yeah, 20 would be excessive. However, 7-10 would not have shocked me one bit. 5-7 was my expectation. But whatever....its 5 games without pay, which (hopefully) should teach him a nice little lesson.

JustAwesome · Post #86 » by **JustAwesome** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:36 am

The punishment should also affect the team. That way, you get the coaches and veteran players getting on Bynum for keeping his head straight.

Betta Bulleavit · Post #87 » by **Betta Bulleavit** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:38 am

jmb987 wrote:
Betta Bulleavit wrote:
No, he isn't losing quadruple what I said was dropping the hammer. You might want to get the math right. To start, I didn't know that Bynum is actually earning almost $170,000 per game. But considering that he obviously is, 850,000 (5 x 170,000) + 25,000 (actual fine) + $200,000 (what I felt the fine should have been) = $1,125,000. So what he is losing is actually about 125,000 less than the minimum that I thought he should have gotten. Notice in my post above that I felt like he should have lost "a cool mil",
which he isn't. Just to clarify.

Well in your original post you didn't mention being suspended w/o pay. I assumed that you can be suspended but still get paid, and I tried looking up the rules on that, but couldn't find any info. Regardless, it was my mistake. I assumed you meant suspended + $200K fine, not suspended w/o pay + 200K fine.

No problem. In fact, it was on me as well because (as you stated) I didn't notate the games w/o pay. Therefore, it left the door open to interpret it either way.

Sinant · Post #88 » by **Sinant** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:44 am

Once you add in the 20-30 games he'll lose to his yearly knee injury, I think things balance out.

ty123 · Post #89 » by **ty123** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:48 am

Only 5? Why isn't it 20? Looks like the league is catering to the Lakers again.

Pimpwerx · Post #90 » by **Pimpwerx** » Wed May 11, 2011 12:55 am

I don't think it's too cynical to think this penalty was given with a Lakers trade in mind. That's...really not cool. PEACE.

jourdy · Post #91 » by **jourdy** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:01 am

5 seems reasonable to me.
10-20 games, like some of you are expecting, sounds ridiculous to be honest. He's already losing 600+k with the 5 games.

jmb987 · Post #92 » by **jmb987** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:02 am

ty123 wrote:Only 5? Why isn't it 20? Looks like the league is catering to the Lakers again.

Jermaine O'neal was suspended 15 games for actually fighting with fans in the 2004 brawl at the Palace. Do you honestly believe what Bynum did was worse?

leaguegod692 · Post #93 » by **leaguegod692** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:08 am

5 is fair enough for me

i thought 5-10

20 would have been excessive

Calvin Klein · Post #94 » by **Calvin Klein** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:23 am

JRich disagrees.

jrich23 Jason Richardson
Damn 5 game suspension + 25k for Andrew Bynum is crazy. His foul was totally wrong but not worth that severe of a punishment.

jrich23 Jason Richardson
Wow! I guess everybody that responded 2 my last tweet is under the age of 21. Do anybody remember the NBA in the 80s?

jrich23 Jason Richardson
I REPEAT HE WAS WRONG! but not 5 games wrong. Maybe a big fine but not games missed.

:noway:

That Nicka · Post #95 » by **That Nicka** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:25 am

ty123 wrote:Only 5? Why isn't it 20? Looks like the league is catering to the Lakers again.

Thats exactly it.

We-Are-Lasers · Post #96 » by **We-Are-Lasers** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:27 am

Calvin Klein wrote:JRich disagrees.

jrich23 Jason Richardson
Damn 5 game suspension + 25k for Andrew Bynum is crazy. His foul was totally wrong but not worth that severe of a punishment.

jrich23 Jason Richardson
Wow! I guess everybody that responded 2 my last tweet is under the age of 21. Do anybody remember the NBA in the 80s?

jrich23 Jason Richardson
I REPEAT HE WAS WRONG! but not 5 games wrong. Maybe a big fine but not games missed.

Isn't he a free agent this summer? I bet he wants a contract :lol:

jmb987 wrote:
ty123 wrote:Only 5? Why isn't it 20? Looks like the league is catering to the Lakers again.

Jermaine O'neal was suspended 15 games for actually fighting with fans in the 2004 brawl at the Palace. Do you honestly believe what Bynum did was worse?

He has been suspended for this before and done it 3 times. The guy needs to get a harsh message I'd say 10 would do.

Post #97 » by **kyphi** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:28 am

some team other than the Lakers will have to worry about him not playing those games - I hope Riley does NOT try to get him.

sweet daddy · Post #98 » by **sweet daddy** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:29 am

Mavs fans aren't in here complaining about the length of the suspension, and JJ is our player.

Look, Bynum shouldn't have taken a little guy out of the air like that, and he's been suspended for it. I said after the game Sunday night that he was gonna end up feeling bad about that once the embarrassment of the game wore off, and I think he did.

He cost himself a bunch of money, he'll have refs eyeing him more closely next year, so he probably just guaranteed himself a foul-plagued year next year. He averaged 2.6 fouls a game this year, anybody wanna bet that goes up next year?

He's only 23, he'll learn from it.

hustlenflow · Post #99 » by **hustlenflow** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:29 am

Calvin Klein wrote:JRich disagrees.

jrich23 Jason Richardson
Damn 5 game suspension + 25k for Andrew Bynum is crazy. His foul was totally wrong but not worth that severe of a punishment.

jrich23 Jason Richardson
Wow! I guess everybody that responded 2 my last tweet is under the age of 21. Do anybody remember the NBA in the 80s?

jrich23 Jason Richardson
I REPEAT HE WAS WRONG! but not 5 games wrong. Maybe a big fine but not games missed.

JRich would agree with 5 if Bynum ran over Barea with his car in the parking lot, drunk @ 120mph.

In all seriousness, 10 is probably the better # of games, but 5 is expected based on previous precedents. I think it's just very disappointing and disturbing that he has done this same exact **** thing 3 times now. I mean, really? No place for that ****, especially since he collapsed a lung doing it the first time... you'd think he'd learn. Between that trash and his injury problems I wouldn't want the kid. GTFO

Winsome Gerbil · Post #100 » by **Winsome Gerbil** » Wed May 11, 2011 1:31 am

That Nicka wrote:
ty123 wrote:Only 5? Why isn't it 20? Looks like the league is catering to the Lakers again.

Thats exactly it.

Uh yeah, because the league suspends guys form other teams for 20 games all the time. I mean just last week it was....um...and last month! Remember last month when they dropped that 20 game suspension on...er...