If Magic's Announcement Happened Today Would He Still Play?

[ItsThatEasy]

Obviously not much was known about HIV in 1991 and it was expected that Magic would retire immediately.

He played in the '92 All-Star game and for the Dream Team but even other players protested his appearance in the All-Star game out of fear for their own health.

My question is, if a superstar made that announcement in 2017 do you believe they would retire or just continue playing with increased medical attention?

[MotownMadness]

Would they allow you to play? Seems like to big of a risk for all the other players on the court.

[ItsThatEasy]

Would they allow you to play? Seems like to big of a risk for all the other players on the court.

I mean, he played 32 games in the '95-'96 season and that was at 36 years old with no real conditioning.

[j-ragg]

Tough to tell. If he could pass a physical, I don't see why not. Maybe his physical requires more rigorous tests, or more frequent testing through the season, but in my semi uneducated opinion I'll say let em play.

[bobobolas10]

I guess you are asking because the HIV might be contagious by blood. A nice elbow thrown to the face might put at risk the player involved. As hard it is to say, I would not let players with that kind of diseases play (diseases transfered by blood)


Didnt Manu Ginobili have to sit out a few weeks because he punched the Bat until he was clear? (Rabies)

[ItsThatEasy]

I guess you are asking because the HIV might be contagious by blood. A nice elbow thrown to the face might put at risk the player involved. As hard it is to say, I would not let players with that kind of diseases play (diseases transfered by blood)


Didnt Manu Ginobili have to sit out a few weeks because he punched the Bat until he was clear? (Rabies)

It would take quite a few circumstances for someone to contract it on the basketball court.

The highest percent would likely be a positive player being cut and the blood splashing into another guys eye. Blood in the eye can transmit the virus but again that's a very specific incident.

[YogurtProducer]

Yeah let him play. The odds of it being transmitted are so unlikely

[D.Brasco]

Would they allow you to play? Seems like to big of a risk for all the other players on the court.

He was cleared to play as early as '93 I believe but there was backlash from actual other NBA players namely Karl Malone against playing with an HIV positive player.

[dautjazz]

Would they allow you to play? Seems like to big of a risk for all the other players on the court.

He was cleared to play as early as '93 I believe but there was backlash from actual other NBA players namely Karl Malone against playing with an HIV positive player.

Malone was definitely very vocal about it, and the biggest star to be speak up about it, but Jeff Malone, Darrell Walker. Doc Rivers, Chris Dudley, Jerry Colangelo and others also supported Malone's point of view.

[Dynomike]

I guess you are asking because the HIV might be contagious by blood. A nice elbow thrown to the face might put at risk the player involved. As hard it is to say, I would not let players with that kind of diseases play (diseases transfered by blood)


Didnt Manu Ginobili have to sit out a few weeks because he punched the Bat until he was clear? (Rabies)

It might not be popular but I agree. Seems like you'd be asking a lot of players to take an unnecessary risk, and I personally wouldn't be comfortable putting myself or another person in that position. I have friends working in nursing and in prisons (as well as a relative with a blood-borne disease) and it's something you have to constantly be aware of, even if the chance of transmitting a disease is lower than I initially thought.

Would the NBA's insurance allow it? Maybe somebody working in that field can answer that for me.

[dlts20]

I don't think anything would be different. Obviously we know more about HIV now but the bottom line is players and their families will always be uncomfortable with it. I was incarcerated before and played with someone who had it and then got cut. Then the guards had to usher him out and everyone was looking to see if they had blood on them. Just makes everyone uneasy even if you have no problem with it in your every day life

[Chinook]

Stern implied that there was at least another player who was HIV positive and played. So I think the answer is that there wouldn't be an announcement. This isn't staph we're talking about.

[lilswift01]

I don't think its that easy to contract HIV. If it was, a lot more people in the world would be infected. I'm pretty sure if you take the medication, then technically your not contagious. I'm not a doctor but i remember reading that somewhere.

[iniazi]

No doubt he would play. With medications today, HIV is completely treatable and when treated has an extremely low risk of transmission.

[DaddyCool19]

As long as he can inject himself with money he should be fine in any era

[dlts20]

It's not about medication and how easy it is to transfer. It's about human inclination. You can tell players and families all day that they won't catch it but don't tell me that alot of guys still wouldn't be uncomfortable or that there won't be an awkward silence from everyone if he gets cut. You might not have anyone on record but I bet a ton of reporters would have a lot of off the record comments or anonymous sources from players who don't like to play against him or would be hesitant to foil or guard him as hard

[Aventador]

HIV is about viral loads. It's hard to pain with a broad stroke. I think to market the product, the league likely will keep it hush hush.

[ropjhk]

A player keeping his HIV status a secret is not the scenario the OP is asking. The question is whether a publicly announced HIV positive player would keep playing. The answer depends on the player himself, but if he wanted to play nobody would stop him. Of course I would expect some players to object, but their voices would get shot down pretty quickly. Most players would keep their objections to themselves.

One thing to consider would be whether the league includes maximum viral load as a condition to playing in the game. That's something that the NBA should work out in the CBA before the issue becomes more visible. Trying to implement such a rule after a player announces they are HIV positive would look really bad.

[D.Brasco]

I guess you are asking because the HIV might be contagious by blood. A nice elbow thrown to the face might put at risk the player involved. As hard it is to say, I would not let players with that kind of diseases play (diseases transfered by blood)


Didnt Manu Ginobili have to sit out a few weeks because he punched the Bat until he was clear? (Rabies)

It might not be popular but I agree. Seems like you'd be asking a lot of players to take an unnecessary risk, and I personally wouldn't be comfortable putting myself or another person in that position. I have friends working in nursing and in prisons (as well as a relative with a blood-borne disease) and it's something you have to constantly be aware of, even if the chance of transmitting a disease is lower than I initially thought.

Would the NBA's insurance allow it? Maybe somebody working in that field can answer that for me.

Read my previous post. Magic was cleared by his doctors to play and the NBA would have allowed him something like a year after his initial announcement to play.

It was due to the vocal displeasure of some other NBA players that he held off until his '95 comeback.

So if the NBA was fine with an HIV+ player playing 20 years ago they'd be even more fine today esp with the better drugs.

[Hornet Mania]

I'd expect a season-long sabbatical at minimum, but he may have returned sooner. Doctors would probably recommend he focus on his health and how his body reacted to his treatments before continuing his career.

I think he'd be welcomed back after that. There might be a few vocal critics among the players, but attitudes have shifted dramatically since the beginning of the 90s. Magic's return would be more inspiration than outrage in 2016.