bigfoot wrote:lilfishi22 wrote:Did the rounds over the weekend listening to different takes on the situation and the only defense that was ever even mentioned was that there is no video or audio recording of him saying those awful things But while there is no hard evidence, it was noted that the image of a racist/sexist/misogynistic/toxic owner might be enough of a deterrent from players, coaches and/or front office staff to join the Suns organisation that Sarver may be forced to sell.
I've never really thought too deeply into whether the allegations were enough to force Sarver to sell because to me, they are separate matters but time and time and again, I've seen posters on this board conflate the two suggesting because it might not be enough to force him to sell, the allegations are therefore not as bad. Or there is a subtle defense of Sarver because more than likely those willing to speak out are those who have left on a bad note and so therefore it's nothing but hurt feelings.
I really do find some of the takes on this board concerning considering some are more ready to defend a guy who we know is a bad owner and we all have heard enough stories before this to know that he's probably not a good leader/boss to work for. This is at the very least, confirmation of that.
This is not whether Sarver is a bad owner which I think many people will agree. He has meddled too much in basketball affairs where he is out of his element.
The allegations try to paint him as a bad person. That's different. ESPN reporting that he is a racist and misogynist without proof or full context of the situation is another matter. ESPN doesn't put on a fair trial where all evidence is presented. Fortunately, for Sarver's good or bad, the NBA will investigate and we will have answers.
Now being a good leader is also much different than being a bad person. Sure he may yell and curse and belittle employees. But certainly, most of us have experienced this with bosses or parents or siblings or relatives or friends or teachers or coaches. Thinking back on your life experiences it would be mighty rare to not have someone close to you who has not been a perfect leader but is a good person.
So when people paint with a broad brush saying Sarver is cheap and meddles with the basketball team and therefore is bad and then equate that to him being a racist and misogynist is the real problem. In America, people are innocent until found guilty, not just because ESPN put out some clickbait that was quite frankly poorly presented. The NBA investigation will be the real trial.
So do you take issue with ESPN putting out an article based on interviews with past Suns staff because it paints Sarver in a bad light? Or that the report is accusatory in nature and little old Sarver is a victim of a clickbaity article? Or do you take issue with Sarver's no harm no foul "yelling and belittling of employees" being blown out of proportions as it's being painted as Sarver's treatment of his employees falling far short of the lowest levels of professionalism? Or is the issue with the supposed mischaracterisation of a good/not-bad guy as a toxic leader (and potentially worse)? What is the appropriate way for these allegations to come to light?
I've worked for my share of poor leaders and managers in my time and while they are at worst incompetent and not great to work for, they haven't had sexist, racist or misogynistic accusations levied against them. I can understand a person (good or bad) being a poor or incompetent leader just as I've worked with good people who are bad workers for one reason or another but the other allegations are extraordinary and extremely serious in nature and certainly shouldn't be taken lightly. While Sarver hasn't earned any benefit of the doubt that you are giving him, seemingly you're giving none to a senior writer at ESPN who's reputation is also at stake with the allegations he's reporting in his article. ESPN would not have allowed the piece to be published without them being confident they can back up those claims otherwise Sarver could sue for defamation.
I agree that the NBA investigation will be one trial and not the back and forth between the article and Sarver's mouthpieces but I also believe Sarver should sue for defamation or at the very least, force a a retraction, as a way to clear his name.