Around the NBA, Season 2019-2020

[red4hf]

Ricky Rubio on the NBA leader board: Rubio leads all NBA starters in AST/TO, ASSIST RATIO and ASSIST PERCENTAGE. He leads all point guards in assist per game and is number three overall behind Lebron and Doncic. Rubio's AST/TO ratio at 4.46 is about double that of his two seasons with the Utah Jazz at 1.98 and 2.31.

Suns have let him run the offense and have been handsomely rewarded...... There's a lesson there for the Jazz...... Unfortunately they haven't seem to have learned anything......

[KqWIN]

How dumb are we going to feel when Jrue Holiday gets moved for less than Mike Conley cost us?

[Rauxcee]

How dumb are we going to feel when Jrue Holiday gets moved for less than Mike Conley cost us?

Can hardly stomach the thought.

[Inigo Montoya]

How dumb are we going to feel when Jrue Holiday gets moved for less than Mike Conley cost us?

This shows we didn't have to make a move when we did. We had another season to make moves if we were dead set on going all in while mortgaging out future. While the Jazz couldn't predict exactly who will be available for trading during the year, players become available during every season. If they didn't get the player they wanted, they should have waited. Of course, it looks like Conley was the player they wanted since there were trade rumors about him for 2 seasons and they eventually did trade for him for a high price. Ugh, can't get over that trade. Such a terrible decision.

[Inigo Montoya]

Trey Burke's father wants the Sixers to trade him.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/256510/Trey-Burkes-Father-Makes-Plea-On-Instagram-For-76ers-To-Trade-His-Son

He pulled the same thing with the Jazz. I won't say anything else, other than good luck.

On a more Jazz related news, the fan the Jazz banned for life is suing them and Westbrook for $100M.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/256501/Banned-Fan-Sues-Jazz-Russell-Westbrook-For-$100-Million-Worth-Of-Damages

I wonder how that works. He was banned for 'shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player.' Will the Jazz and\or Westbrook have to prove he actually did that? Or will the fan have to prove that he didn't, which is very hard to do. Under the presumption of innocence, wouldn't the Jazz or Westbrook have to prove his guilt? How will they be able to do that?

[KqWIN]

Trey Burke's father wants the Sixers to trade him.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/256510/Trey-Burkes-Father-Makes-Plea-On-Instagram-For-76ers-To-Trade-His-Son

He pulled the same thing with the Jazz. I won't say anything else, other than good luck.

On a more Jazz related news, the fan the Jazz banned for life is suing them and Westbrook for $100M.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/256501/Banned-Fan-Sues-Jazz-Russell-Westbrook-For-$100-Million-Worth-Of-Damages

I wonder how that works. He was banned for 'shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player.' Will the Jazz and\or Westbrook have to prove he actually did that? Or will the fan have to prove that he didn't, which is very hard to do. Under the presumption of innocence, wouldn't the Jazz or Westbrook have to prove his guilt? How will they be able to do that?

The Jazz/Westbrook don't have to prove anything. They are the defendant and have the presumption of innocence, not the other way around. The fan will have to prove them guilty of defamation or whatever else is in the suit.

This is nothing more than a sad cry for attention and a cheap attempt at getting a few bucks.

[Inigo Montoya]

This is nothing more than a sad cry for attention and a cheap attempt at getting a few bucks.

Probably.

The Jazz/Westbrook don't have to prove anything. They are the defendant and have the presumption of innocence, not the other way around. The fan will have to prove them guilty of defamation or whatever else is in the suit.

I would assume the fan will claim that the accusation of him shouting something racist has defamed him and caused him harm in various ways. What I'm trying to understand is if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't shout what Wesbrook claimed he did and what the Jazz banned him for.

[KqWIN]

This is nothing more than a sad cry for attention and a cheap attempt at getting a few bucks.

Probably.

The Jazz/Westbrook don't have to prove anything. They are the defendant and have the presumption of innocence, not the other way around. The fan will have to prove them guilty of defamation or whatever else is in the suit.

I would assume the fan will claim that the accusation of him shouting something racist has defamed him and caused him harm in various ways. What I'm trying to understand is if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't shout what Wesbrook claimed he did and what the Jazz banned him for.

I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the fan will have to prove that his ban was unjust AND that the ban caused him X amount of damages (of course it's not $100M). In this case, the Jazz are innocent until proven guilty. It would be very difficult to prove that they didn't have a case for banning him. It's almost guaranteed that the have it written somewhere that they have right ban someone for any reason to protect themselves against morons like this.

Even if he can somehow prove that he didn't say what he said (which I believe is on video), they can still be justified in their ban. But again, the burden is on him to prove that he didn't. It's not on the Jazz to prove that he did.

[Crunch 99]

Random information: Carmelo Anthony is performing well as a screen assist guy for Lillard and McCollum.

From Zach Lowe:

One reason Melo has fit in Portland: He is setting almost 23 screens per 100 possessions, by far the highest rate of his career, per Second Spectrum. That makes sense given he is a full-time big man screening for two star guards. The Trail Blazers are scoring almost 1.08 points per play directly out of Melo screening actions -- 19th among 141 players who have set at least 100 picks, per Second Spectrum.

[red4hf]

This is nothing more than a sad cry for attention and a cheap attempt at getting a few bucks.

Probably.

The Jazz/Westbrook don't have to prove anything. They are the defendant and have the presumption of innocence, not the other way around. The fan will have to prove them guilty of defamation or whatever else is in the suit.

I would assume the fan will claim that the accusation of him shouting something racist has defamed him and caused him harm in various ways. What I'm trying to understand is if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't shout what Wesbrook claimed he did and what the Jazz banned him for.

I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the fan will have to prove that his ban was unjust AND that the ban caused him X amount of damages (of course it's not $100M). In this case, the Jazz are innocent until proven guilty. It would be very difficult to prove that they didn't have a case for banning him. It's almost guaranteed that the have it written somewhere that they have right ban someone for any reason to protect themselves against morons like this.

Even if he can somehow prove that he didn't say what he said (which I believe is on video), they can still be justified in their ban. But again, the burden is on him to prove that he didn't. It's not on the Jazz to prove that he did.

No, you can't ban someone for "any reason" (just like hanging a sign in your business that says "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" doesn't actually give you the right to refuse service to anyone you wish..... If he can prove he didn't say what Westbrook and the Jazz accused him of, the Jazz might be liable, including possibly for defamation...... That's of course a big if, I'm sure the Jazz had plenty of evidence......

[KqWIN]

Probably.



I would assume the fan will claim that the accusation of him shouting something racist has defamed him and caused him harm in various ways. What I'm trying to understand is if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't shout what Wesbrook claimed he did and what the Jazz banned him for.

I'm no expert, but my understanding is that the fan will have to prove that his ban was unjust AND that the ban caused him X amount of damages (of course it's not $100M). In this case, the Jazz are innocent until proven guilty. It would be very difficult to prove that they didn't have a case for banning him. It's almost guaranteed that the have it written somewhere that they have right ban someone for any reason to protect themselves against morons like this.

Even if he can somehow prove that he didn't say what he said (which I believe is on video), they can still be justified in their ban. But again, the burden is on him to prove that he didn't. It's not on the Jazz to prove that he did.

No, you can't ban someone for "any reason" (just like hanging a sign in your business that says "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" doesn't actually give you the right to refuse service to anyone you wish..... If he can prove he didn't say what Westbrook and the Jazz accused him of, the Jazz might be liable, including poaaibly for defamation...... That's of course a big if, I'm sure the Jazz had plenty of evidence......

I should have been more clear. I don't mean that they had one of those signs...but they probably have it written that they can ban someone for something gray. Something like general misconduct or excessive behavior. They don't have it written out that you have to be racist to be removed is what I'm saying.

Even if he can 100% prove that he didn't say it, it doesn't even come close to giving him a case. The case is not whether he said it or not.

[Inigo Montoya]

Even if he can 100% prove that he didn't say it, it doesn't even come close to giving him a case. The case is not whether he said it or not.

I think it might be, because once racism was alleged, he can claim slander and damage to his reputation and the like. Basically, the entire country (exaggeration) may view this guy as a racist based on Westbrook's allegations and the Jazz's actions. This is why I'm interested if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't say something racist (and not if he said anything at all or heckled) because that is the crux of the matter. The Jazz could certainly ban him for a host of things, but if they\Westbrook claim the fan said something racist then I'm guessing someone (Jazz\Westbrook\fan) will have to either prove or disprove it. The fan isn't suing the Jazz for banning him, he's suing the Jazz and Westbrook "claiming he was wrongly accused of shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player."

[red4hf]

Even if he can 100% prove that he didn't say it, it doesn't even come close to giving him a case. The case is not whether he said it or not.

I think it might be, because once racism was alleged, he can claim slander and damage to his reputation and the like. Basically, the entire country (exaggeration) may view this guy as a racist based on Westbrook's allegations and the Jazz's actions. This is why I'm interested if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't say something racist (and not if he said anything at all or heckled) because that is the crux of the matter. The Jazz could certainly ban him for a host of things, but if they\Westbrook claim the fan said something racist then I'm guessing someone (Jazz\Westbrook\fan) will have to either prove or disprove it. The fan isn't suing the Jazz for banning him, he's suing the Jazz and Westbrook "claiming he was wrongly accused of shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player."

Exactly..... Public figures have a very hard time proving libel and slander because the Supreme Court decided they have to prove "actual malice"..... This guy is not a public figure, so the standard for him is lower...... The team might have been better off banning him for something like "unruly conduct" which you can interpret 1000 different ways...... But by claiming that they banned him for racist statements they are painting themselves into a corner if he didn't actually make those statements......

[KqWIN]

Even if he can 100% prove that he didn't say it, it doesn't even come close to giving him a case. The case is not whether he said it or not.

I think it might be, because once racism was alleged, he can claim slander and damage to his reputation and the like. Basically, the entire country (exaggeration) may view this guy as a racist based on Westbrook's allegations and the Jazz's actions. This is why I'm interested if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't say something racist (and not if he said anything at all or heckled) because that is the crux of the matter. The Jazz could certainly ban him for a host of things, but if they\Westbrook claim the fan said something racist then I'm guessing someone (Jazz\Westbrook\fan) will have to either prove or disprove it. The fan isn't suing the Jazz for banning him, he's suing the Jazz and Westbrook "claiming he was wrongly accused of shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player."

Exactly..... Public figures have a very hard time proving libel and slander because the Supreme Court decided they have to prove "actual malice"..... This guy is not a public figure, so the standard for him is lower...... The team might have been better off banning him for something like "unruly conduct" which you can interpret 1000 different ways...... But by claiming that they banned him for racist statements they are painting themselves into a corner if he didn't actually make those statements......

They also never said his name and didn't explicitly say it was racism. WB didn't say his name either. The fan himself inserted his name in the conversation going on public news.

It was heavily implied to be racism, but the team/Gail called the incident a violation of the code of conduct, lack of respect, etc while racism was only mentioned in broader contexts by Gail. "We are not a racist community", that type of thing. Never did the Jazz say the fan was banned for racism. Both the official statement and Gail's speech are bulletproof.

The Utah Jazz and Larry H. Miller Group announced today a permanent ban of the fan who engaged in the inappropriate interaction with the Oklahoma City Thunder’s Russell Westbrook last night at Vivint Smart Home Arena. The ban is effective immediately and includes all arena events.

The organization conducted an investigation through video review and eyewitness accounts. The ban is based on excessive and derogatory verbal abuse directed at a player during the game that violated the NBA Code of Conduct.

The Utah Jazz will not tolerate fans who act inappropriately. There is no place in our game for personal attacks or disrespect.

“Everyone deserves the opportunity to enjoy and play the game in a safe, positive and inclusive environment,” said Steve Starks, president of the Utah Jazz. “Offensive and abusive behavior does not reflect the values of the Miller family, our organization and the community. We all have a responsibility to respect the game of basketball and, more importantly, each other as human beings. This has always been a hallmark of our incredible fan base and should forever be our standard moving forward.”

https://www.nba.com/jazz/news/statement-utah-jazz

[red4hf]

I think it might be, because once racism was alleged, he can claim slander and damage to his reputation and the like. Basically, the entire country (exaggeration) may view this guy as a racist based on Westbrook's allegations and the Jazz's actions. This is why I'm interested if either side will have to prove that he did or didn't say something racist (and not if he said anything at all or heckled) because that is the crux of the matter. The Jazz could certainly ban him for a host of things, but if they\Westbrook claim the fan said something racist then I'm guessing someone (Jazz\Westbrook\fan) will have to either prove or disprove it. The fan isn't suing the Jazz for banning him, he's suing the Jazz and Westbrook "claiming he was wrongly accused of shouting racist and derogatory terms against the current Rockets player."

Exactly..... Public figures have a very hard time proving libel and slander because the Supreme Court decided they have to prove "actual malice"..... This guy is not a public figure, so the standard for him is lower...... The team might have been better off banning him for something like "unruly conduct" which you can interpret 1000 different ways...... But by claiming that they banned him for racist statements they are painting themselves into a corner if he didn't actually make those statements......

They also never said his name and didn't explicitly say it was racism. WB didn't say his name either. The fan himself inserted his name in the conversation going on public news.

It was heavily implied to be racism, but the team/Gail called the incident a violation of the code of conduct, lack of respect, etc while racism was only mentioned in broader contexts by Gail. "We are not a racist community", that type of thing. Never did the Jazz say the fan was banned for racism. Both the official statement and Gail's speech are bulletproof.

The Utah Jazz and Larry H. Miller Group announced today a permanent ban of the fan who engaged in the inappropriate interaction with the Oklahoma City Thunder’s Russell Westbrook last night at Vivint Smart Home Arena. The ban is effective immediately and includes all arena events.

The organization conducted an investigation through video review and eyewitness accounts. The ban is based on excessive and derogatory verbal abuse directed at a player during the game that violated the NBA Code of Conduct.

The Utah Jazz will not tolerate fans who act inappropriately. There is no place in our game for personal attacks or disrespect.

“Everyone deserves the opportunity to enjoy and play the game in a safe, positive and inclusive environment,” said Steve Starks, president of the Utah Jazz. “Offensive and abusive behavior does not reflect the values of the Miller family, our organization and the community. We all have a responsibility to respect the game of basketball and, more importantly, each other as human beings. This has always been a hallmark of our incredible fan base and should forever be our standard moving forward.”

https://www.nba.com/jazz/news/statement-utah-jazz

That above would suggest the fan has no case......

BUT Gail Miller also said this:

“I am extremely disappointed that one of our quote ‘fans’ conducted himself in such a way as to offend not only a guest in our arena, but also me personally, my family, our organization, the community, our players and you, as the best fans in the NBA,” Miller said in her address.

“This should never happen. We are not a racist community. We believe in treating people with courtesy and respect as human beings. From time to time, individual fans exhibit poor behavior and forget their manners and disrespect players on other teams. When that happens, I want you to jump up and shout ‘stop.’ We have a code of conduct in this arena. It will be strictly enforced.”

The organization really implied he was banned for racist statements...... He could credibly argue he was defamed, IF he didn't actually say anything racist.....It doesn't really matter if they didn't explicitly name him, he was shown on TV...... I think the lawsuit is a long shot, but, it's not completely frivolous......

[KqWIN]

Exactly..... Public figures have a very hard time proving libel and slander because the Supreme Court decided they have to prove "actual malice"..... This guy is not a public figure, so the standard for him is lower...... The team might have been better off banning him for something like "unruly conduct" which you can interpret 1000 different ways...... But by claiming that they banned him for racist statements they are painting themselves into a corner if he didn't actually make those statements......

They also never said his name and didn't explicitly say it was racism. WB didn't say his name either. The fan himself inserted his name in the conversation going on public news.

It was heavily implied to be racism, but the team/Gail called the incident a violation of the code of conduct, lack of respect, etc while racism was only mentioned in broader contexts by Gail. "We are not a racist community", that type of thing. Never did the Jazz say the fan was banned for racism. Both the official statement and Gail's speech are bulletproof.

The Utah Jazz and Larry H. Miller Group announced today a permanent ban of the fan who engaged in the inappropriate interaction with the Oklahoma City Thunder’s Russell Westbrook last night at Vivint Smart Home Arena. The ban is effective immediately and includes all arena events.

The organization conducted an investigation through video review and eyewitness accounts. The ban is based on excessive and derogatory verbal abuse directed at a player during the game that violated the NBA Code of Conduct.

The Utah Jazz will not tolerate fans who act inappropriately. There is no place in our game for personal attacks or disrespect.

“Everyone deserves the opportunity to enjoy and play the game in a safe, positive and inclusive environment,” said Steve Starks, president of the Utah Jazz. “Offensive and abusive behavior does not reflect the values of the Miller family, our organization and the community. We all have a responsibility to respect the game of basketball and, more importantly, each other as human beings. This has always been a hallmark of our incredible fan base and should forever be our standard moving forward.”

https://www.nba.com/jazz/news/statement-utah-jazz

That above would suggest the fan has no case......

BUT Gail Miller also said this:

“I am extremely disappointed that one of our quote ‘fans’ conducted himself in such a way as to offend not only a guest in our arena, but also me personally, my family, our organization, the community, our players and you, as the best fans in the NBA,” Miller said in her address.

“This should never happen. We are not a racist community. We believe in treating people with courtesy and respect as human beings. From time to time, individual fans exhibit poor behavior and forget their manners and disrespect players on other teams. When that happens, I want you to jump up and shout ‘stop.’ We have a code of conduct in this arena. It will be strictly enforced.”

The organization really implied he was banned for racist statements...... He could credibly argue he was defamed, IF he didn't actually say anything racist.....It doesn't really matter if they didn't explicitly name him, he was shown on TV...... I think the lawsuit is a long shot, but, it's not completely frivolous......

Again, the racism was implied but no accusations were made for racism. It does matter if he was not named in a defamation case. He was also not shown on TV. The video was not on the broadcast and did not include the fan at all. The only reason we know who the identity of the fan is because he willingly gave an interview to KSL because he wanted attention so badly.

[red4hf]

He "willingly" gave an interview after being accused of being a racist on national TV...... You may disagree, but I think, so long as there's isn't actually evidence of him saying anything racist, his lawsuit may have a shot......

[KqWIN]

He "willingly" gave an interview after being accused of being a racist on national TV...... You may disagree, but I think, so long as there's isn't actually evidence of him saying anything racist, his lawsuit may have a shot......

Nobody accused him, he outed himself. Nobody would have any idea it was him unless he did so. And again, there doesn't have to be evidence that he said something racist. He has to prove that he didn't. How can he prove that he said he was telling WB to ice his knees and not telling him to get on his knees?

Defamation charges also have to have intent and/or negligence of truth. For example, if WB misheard this guy, that is not defamation.

[Rauxcee]

Didn't this same guy have a bunch of racist tweets that people found and he then deleted them after the incident? I remember reading them.

[Crunch 99]

Derrick Favors returned to regular starter minutes five games ago, and not uncoincidentally, New Orleans went on to win four out the next five games, including winning the last four in a row. ESPN reported that Favors averaged a double double in 30.6 mpg during the win streak, including 10.5 ppg, 14.5 rebs and 4 orebs, and that opponents only scored 100 points per 100 possessions while Favors was on the floor.

Favors is listed at 265 pounds. Didn't he get his weight down lower last season to try to relieve pressure on joints and back? I may be remembering incorrectly, but I thought he got his weight down to 250 lbs. I hope Favors is able to stay healthy and play starter minutes the rest of the season.