Woj: "This locker room never got over Ime Udoka's dismissal as head coach"

[hugepatsfan]

feels like you're trying to 'well actually' away perceived racism. I don't know if any or many of the players actually perceive that here, but there's reason to suspect they might.

"Well actually" would be if someone had an example that a white marketing manager in the organization screwed around with a black accounting intern and kept his job. Or that both were let go. That would be a double standard. That would be perceived or actual racism. If that were the case, I would be on the players side. Not about keeping Ime, but about criticizing the organization.

You do not fire the subordinate employees for improper workplace relationships. I don't care what race they are. That's dumb. If the players are upset because they think she should be fired too and isn't being because of race, then they have a stupid stance. That simple to me.

Racism is very, very real and systemic biases in the workplaces should always be discussed. It does not explain why a subordinate employee would not be fired for this relationship though.

I'm not arguing the logic of everything you're saying, because you're right. And I'm entirely speculating here, but I suspect you're giving people credit for analyzing things in more depth than they might be. It is a sound-byte, short-attention span world. You get one sentence -- heck, one fragment of a sentence -- in a lot of contexts, and I suspect the world of professional sports might be one of them. To be clear what I'm saying is that some -- maybe including some Boston Celtics -- might not care to think about superior/subordinate relationships. They might just look at skin color and who has a job and who doesn't -- full stop. That's it. Then onto social media.

I could be wrong. Heck, I hope I am. But I don't think we get enough of a glimpse to say for sure.

I gotcha. I guess I'd just hope that aspect of things was hashed out early. I know they aren't going to confirm for the players who was involved or whatever, but you know word gets around. It's well known through rumors/reports now that it was Ime (black coach) with someone's (white) wife and that she's still employed. I'd hope that if the players felt some type of way about that on a racial front, they'd raise the issue. That aspect of it should have been hashed out a long time ago. Shame on the players/organization if not.

[djFan71]

How bad could Ime's behavior have been if the NBA felt no need to punish him and the Rockets were willing to sign him?

I'm sure that question is running in their heads.

The NBA didn't step up when Kidd or Billups were hired either. It's pretty clear that they don't get involved in coaching searches.

Considering the NBA gave Miles Bridges a 10 game suspension for hitting his girlfriend in front of their children I really don't think they care about protecting women from abusive relationships. So their inaction doesn't mean anything.

Ime's behavior was bad enough that a multibillion corporation was willing to risk tanking their product for the following year to get rid of him. He isn't a martyr or even a victim here.

And a second team took a look at him midseason and decided to pass as well. Then tanked their season instead.

[Bar Fight]

I said this at the time. Right or wrong, firing Ime for having a consensual affair with a white executive’s wife is really bad optics for players on the team and around the league.

The black man was fired. The white woman kept her job. The players remember that every time they see her at the facility.

The reasons workplace relationships are usually disallowed by companies is because of the potential abuse of power but the person higher up. It can make the person underneath them feel pressured to stay in the relationship past them wanting to for fear of negative consequences. It can make others in the organization that find out or hear whispers feel pressured. It can make other people in charge feel empowered to hit on people beneath them. Lots of bad consequences and all of them are about the person in the higher ranking position. It's an idiotic suggestion that the subordinate person be punished for it because it only adds to the potential of toxicity in the workplace. Now you have people feeling like if someone hits on them they're in trouble too.

If the players are really mad that she kept her job there should be no pacification of that. Again, they should be looked right in the eyes and told what uninformed morons they are.

That sounds like a good way to get your entire team demand trades/walk in free agency.

[JR Hawks]

I said this at the time. Right or wrong, firing Ime for having a consensual affair with a white executive’s wife is really bad optics for players on the team and around the league.

The black man was fired. The white woman kept her job. The players remember that every time they see her at the facility.

The reasons workplace relationships are usually disallowed by companies is because of the potential abuse of power but the person higher up. It can make the person underneath them feel pressured to stay in the relationship past them wanting to for fear of negative consequences. It can make others in the organization that find out or hear whispers feel pressured. It can make other people in charge feel empowered to hit on people beneath them. Lots of bad consequences and all of them are about the person in the higher ranking position. It's an idiotic suggestion that the subordinate person be punished for it because it only adds to the potential of toxicity in the workplace. Now you have people feeling like if someone hits on them they're in trouble too.

If the players are really mad that she kept her job there should be no pacification of that. Again, they should be looked right in the eyes and told what uninformed morons they are.

Lol, you think Ime just hit on this white woman?They were having a consensual affair. And the mostly black players know that. The Me Too rules of the day approved by absolutely no one don't override hundreds of years of racist treatment in the workplace.

[JR Hawks]

In this day and age they should be sophisticated enough to know this is all contractual, ie, non-disclosure agreements.

These guys want to be sophisticated high-end investors then bitch about how that world works.

There are some things that can be said without violating an agreement.

There are other things that can be said behind closed doors if players are trusted to treat the subject matter maturely, or if the organization values it's players more than it values paying a small money settlement.

There are some things that maybe cannot be said irrespective of contracts, for the sake of acting honorably, and on some level it might simply be an unfortunate situation. However, the mixed messages that the organization has given out from the beginning likely have caused issues. They can at least make an effort behind closed doors to clarify any confusion.

I know that I was rubbed the wrong way by how everything played out, and by Wyc and Brad's press conference. I couldn't blame the players for feeling similarly, especially if they received no further clarification than we did. In fact, if we take Marcus Smart at face value, the players were apparently given the impression that Ime would be returning.

If Ime did something that management disapproved of so much that they felt it was worthy of a one year suspension - why not fire him right away?

It is not a situation where Ime will put up a fight, it is better for him to be officially fired than quasi fired. It is not a situation where the Celtics need to excuse their decision to fire him, they can fire him for any reason.

It is possibly a situation where if the Celtics fire him without a negotiated settlement, maybe Ime sues and maybe they have to pay his remaining salary. Said salary would have represented a very small percentage of team payroll, it would not have affected our cap situation, and the team's willingness to risk it would have sent a clear message that the Celtics do not approve of such behavior, and will not put up with it in any capacity even if they have financial incentive or legal incentive to do so.

Wyc even quasi bragged about Ime thanking the team for keeping his behaviour secret, perhaps as if he was trying to say "we like Ime and it sucks that he got caught, we are at least trying to cover for him."

Realistically, I think it is a situation where they decided to fire ime right away - but they were worried about how the players would respond to that, so they tried to keep up a ruse until the team showed some success under Joe and the team could claim "we aren't firing Ime because we want to, we are firing him because Joe has earned the job." Or maybe they were waiting for someone else to hire Ime, idk.

And this reaks of Brad Stevens IMO, because it is exactly how he managed the team when he was coach, unwilling to contradict players, to man up with players, unwilling to truly stand up for his principles because he was worried about how the players might perceive him. No leadership and accountability, just posturing.

I could go on about this and more, I'm just saying.

Well that's kind of the point of the agreement. If they want to go back to the 80s and good ol boys clubs then they should recognize that comes with 7-8 figure career earnings, not 9.

If they want to live in the 9 figure career earnings world, that's a corporate world and that is a world of contracts. Most here didn't even recognize that all corporate contracts today have non-fraternizing language in them, and that includes Ime's coaching contract without any doubt. Hard part is if they want to fire him then they have document what happened and it's easy for it to get public.

If they want to actually respect the terms of their agreements unlike Ime then that's not a bad thing.

Frankly if the players don't want to see that then they are a bunch of hypocritical pussies.

They may have been led on like you say, def possibility there. It's just a **** excuse as a player imo.

Does the non-fraternizing language apply to white VP's and their white wives? Apparently not.

[JR Hawks]

The reasons workplace relationships are usually disallowed by companies is because of the potential abuse of power but the person higher up. It can make the person underneath them feel pressured to stay in the relationship past them wanting to for fear of negative consequences. It can make others in the organization that find out or hear whispers feel pressured. It can make other people in charge feel empowered to hit on people beneath them. Lots of bad consequences and all of them are about the person in the higher ranking position. It's an idiotic suggestion that the subordinate person be punished for it because it only adds to the potential of toxicity in the workplace. Now you have people feeling like if someone hits on them they're in trouble too.

If the players are really mad that she kept her job there should be no pacification of that. Again, they should be looked right in the eyes and told what uninformed morons they are.

feels like you're trying to 'well actually' away perceived racism. I don't know if any or many of the players actually perceive that here, but there's reason to suspect they might.

"Well actually" would be if someone had an example that a white marketing manager in the organization screwed around with a black accounting intern and kept his job. Or that both were let go. That would be a double standard. That would be perceived or actual racism. If that were the case, I would be on the players side. Not about keeping Ime, but about criticizing the organization.

You do not fire the subordinate employees for improper workplace relationships. I don't care what race they are. That's dumb. If the players are upset because they think she should be fired too and isn't being because of race, then they have a stupid stance. That simple to me.

Racism is very, very real and systemic biases in the workplaces should always be discussed. It does not explain why a subordinate employee would not be fired for this relationship though.

By subordinate employee, do you mean the wife of the VP that outranks Ime?

Ime is the subordinate employee.

[hugepatsfan]

feels like you're trying to 'well actually' away perceived racism. I don't know if any or many of the players actually perceive that here, but there's reason to suspect they might.

"Well actually" would be if someone had an example that a white marketing manager in the organization screwed around with a black accounting intern and kept his job. Or that both were let go. That would be a double standard. That would be perceived or actual racism. If that were the case, I would be on the players side. Not about keeping Ime, but about criticizing the organization.

You do not fire the subordinate employees for improper workplace relationships. I don't care what race they are. That's dumb. If the players are upset because they think she should be fired too and isn't being because of race, then they have a stupid stance. That simple to me.

Racism is very, very real and systemic biases in the workplaces should always be discussed. It does not explain why a subordinate employee would not be fired for this relationship though.

By subordinate employee, do you mean the wife of the VP that outranks Ime?

Ime is the subordinate employee.

She was his secretary from the reports I've read. She was subordinate to him in a direct managerial way. Every company I've ever worked at allows workplace relationships, but they have to be reported to HR and there can be no direct oversight or interaction between the two. I imagine the Celtics are the same.

[zoyathedestroya]

Lol. Such a dumb narrative. You can call Joe way in over his head without bringing Ime (and his firing) into it.

Read on Twitter

[aim2please]

Woj and Udoka share the same agency, which is why Woj 'broke' Udoka's story by constantly repeating 'consensual relationship'.

Hours before game 7 vs Philly, Woj put up a tweet about referee's favoring C's in game 6.

After going down 3-0 to the Heat, Woj 'breaks' a story how players are not over Udoka's dismissal.

How long before people realize this guy is a scumbag and not a reporter. Conflict of interest is blatant with a lot of these media types, they favor teams/players that give them access/inside scoops.

[165bows]

There are some things that can be said without violating an agreement.

There are other things that can be said behind closed doors if players are trusted to treat the subject matter maturely, or if the organization values it's players more than it values paying a small money settlement.

There are some things that maybe cannot be said irrespective of contracts, for the sake of acting honorably, and on some level it might simply be an unfortunate situation. However, the mixed messages that the organization has given out from the beginning likely have caused issues. They can at least make an effort behind closed doors to clarify any confusion.

I know that I was rubbed the wrong way by how everything played out, and by Wyc and Brad's press conference. I couldn't blame the players for feeling similarly, especially if they received no further clarification than we did. In fact, if we take Marcus Smart at face value, the players were apparently given the impression that Ime would be returning.

If Ime did something that management disapproved of so much that they felt it was worthy of a one year suspension - why not fire him right away?

It is not a situation where Ime will put up a fight, it is better for him to be officially fired than quasi fired. It is not a situation where the Celtics need to excuse their decision to fire him, they can fire him for any reason.

It is possibly a situation where if the Celtics fire him without a negotiated settlement, maybe Ime sues and maybe they have to pay his remaining salary. Said salary would have represented a very small percentage of team payroll, it would not have affected our cap situation, and the team's willingness to risk it would have sent a clear message that the Celtics do not approve of such behavior, and will not put up with it in any capacity even if they have financial incentive or legal incentive to do so.

Wyc even quasi bragged about Ime thanking the team for keeping his behaviour secret, perhaps as if he was trying to say "we like Ime and it sucks that he got caught, we are at least trying to cover for him."

Realistically, I think it is a situation where they decided to fire ime right away - but they were worried about how the players would respond to that, so they tried to keep up a ruse until the team showed some success under Joe and the team could claim "we aren't firing Ime because we want to, we are firing him because Joe has earned the job." Or maybe they were waiting for someone else to hire Ime, idk.

And this reaks of Brad Stevens IMO, because it is exactly how he managed the team when he was coach, unwilling to contradict players, to man up with players, unwilling to truly stand up for his principles because he was worried about how the players might perceive him. No leadership and accountability, just posturing.

I could go on about this and more, I'm just saying.

Well that's kind of the point of the agreement. If they want to go back to the 80s and good ol boys clubs then they should recognize that comes with 7-8 figure career earnings, not 9.

If they want to live in the 9 figure career earnings world, that's a corporate world and that is a world of contracts. Most here didn't even recognize that all corporate contracts today have non-fraternizing language in them, and that includes Ime's coaching contract without any doubt. Hard part is if they want to fire him then they have document what happened and it's easy for it to get public.

If they want to actually respect the terms of their agreements unlike Ime then that's not a bad thing.

Frankly if the players don't want to see that then they are a bunch of hypocritical pussies.

They may have been led on like you say, def possibility there. It's just a **** excuse as a player imo.

Does the non-fraternizing language apply to white VP's and their white wives? Apparently not.

Wait I thought Ime just had sex with only the wife.

[Hal14]

Woj and Udoka share the same agency, which is why Woj 'broke' Udoka's story by constantly repeating 'consensual relationship'.

Hours before game 7 vs Philly, Woj put up a tweet about referee's favoring C's in game 6.

After going down 3-0 to the Heat, Woj 'breaks' a story how players are not over Udoka's dismissal.

How long before people realize this guy is a scumbag and not a reporter. Conflict of interest is blatant with a lot of these media types, they favor teams/players that give them access/inside scoops.

Well that would explain where all the KD to Boston trade talk leaks came from lol.

[SatchSanders]

"Well actually" would be if someone had an example that a white marketing manager in the organization screwed around with a black accounting intern and kept his job. Or that both were let go. That would be a double standard. That would be perceived or actual racism. If that were the case, I would be on the players side. Not about keeping Ime, but about criticizing the organization.

You do not fire the subordinate employees for improper workplace relationships. I don't care what race they are. That's dumb. If the players are upset because they think she should be fired too and isn't being because of race, then they have a stupid stance. That simple to me.

Racism is very, very real and systemic biases in the workplaces should always be discussed. It does not explain why a subordinate employee would not be fired for this relationship though.

By subordinate employee, do you mean the wife of the VP that outranks Ime?

Ime is the subordinate employee.

She was his secretary from the reports I've read. She was subordinate to him in a direct managerial way. Every company I've ever worked at allows workplace relationships, but they have to be reported to HR and there can be no direct oversight or interaction between the two. I imagine the Celtics are the same.

The (white) VP's (white) wife was (black) Ime's secretary? Do I have that part of the rumor correct?

If that's the case, then the nepotism plays a big part in all this. Technically Ime has power over the secretary. But not really if said secretary isn't Patty from Quincy but rather the white VP's wife. Mix that with Ime being black and the perception of racism, and you have a toxic brew. Yes Ime got together with a subordinate, but said subordinate shouldn't have been in that job in the first place (and neither should Austin be there, BTW).

Oh, and Wojnarowski is a complete scumbag who applies his news "filters" very carefully.

[165bows]

By subordinate employee, do you mean the wife of the VP that outranks Ime?

Ime is the subordinate employee.

She was his secretary from the reports I've read. She was subordinate to him in a direct managerial way. Every company I've ever worked at allows workplace relationships, but they have to be reported to HR and there can be no direct oversight or interaction between the two. I imagine the Celtics are the same.

The (white) VP's (white) wife was (black) Ime's secretary? Do I have that part of the rumor correct?

If that's the case, then the nepotism plays a big part in all this. Technically Ime has power over the secretary. But not really if said secretary isn't Patty from Quincy but rather the white VP's wife. Mix that with Ime being black and the perception of racism, and you have a toxic brew. Yes Ime got together with a subordinate, but said subordinate shouldn't have been in that job in the first place (and neither should Austin be there, BTW).

Oh, and Wojnarowski is a complete scumbag who applies his news "filters" very carefully.

This seems like a ton of fishing. The reports were that he wouldn't leave her alone after she broke it off and was pursuing her sexually when she told him to stop.

That will get you **** canned anywhere.

[rd26]

Most of this is probably just BS, but I do wonder if Grant's sudden disappearance from the rotation could possibly be where some of this is coming from.

[hickfromfrenchlick]

Sorry, can't agree with this. The Celtics were a wrecking machine to start the year, just a few days after the Udoka suspension. Yes, I'm sure the players weren't happy (probably weren't happy to be left in the dark either), but this debacle can't be attributed to that.

Nobody was saying this crap after we beat the Sixers, either

[31to6]

Most of this is probably just BS, but I do wonder if Grant's sudden disappearance from the rotation could possibly be where some of this is coming from.

? because Grant doesn't like/respect/accept Joe?

[lon3lytoaster]

Woj and Udoka share the same agency, which is why Woj 'broke' Udoka's story by constantly repeating 'consensual relationship'.

Hours before game 7 vs Philly, Woj put up a tweet about referee's favoring C's in game 6.

After going down 3-0 to the Heat, Woj 'breaks' a story how players are not over Udoka's dismissal.

How long before people realize this guy is a scumbag and not a reporter. Conflict of interest is blatant with a lot of these media types, they favor teams/players that give them access/inside scoops.

Woj certainly did turn into a gossip monger after Shams started breaking more of the real news.

[rd26]

Most of this is probably just BS, but I do wonder if Grant's sudden disappearance from the rotation could possibly be where some of this is coming from.

? because Grant doesn't like/respect/accept Joe?

Maybe, I'm just speculating, but playing Horford 35 mins a game, even after Grant started playing pretty well again just always stunk of something off the court to me.

I actually suspected they were trying to drive his next contract down for awhile. Insubordination is probably more likely.

[31to6]

Most of this is probably just BS, but I do wonder if Grant's sudden disappearance from the rotation could possibly be where some of this is coming from.

? because Grant doesn't like/respect/accept Joe?

Maybe, I'm just speculating, but playing Horford 35 mins a game, even after Grant started playing pretty well again just always stunk of something off the court to me.

I actually suspected they were trying to drive his next contract down for awhile. Insubordination is probably more likely.

I thought
a) reduce contract demands
b) send a message about whining to officials
and think they might have been somewhat successful on both fronts!

Grant seems like a people pleaser to me enough that I wouldn't suspect him of fomenting rebellion in the locker-room, but I of course have no idea.

[rd26]

? because Grant doesn't like/respect/accept Joe?

Maybe, I'm just speculating, but playing Horford 35 mins a game, even after Grant started playing pretty well again just always stunk of something off the court to me.

I actually suspected they were trying to drive his next contract down for awhile. Insubordination is probably more likely.

I thought
a) reduce contract demands
b) send a message about whining to officials
and think they might have been somewhat successful on both fronts!

Grant seems like a people pleaser to me enough that I wouldn't suspect him of fomenting rebellion in the locker-room, but I of course have no idea.

I agree with all of that, but he resurfaced about the same time the team supposedly demanded the doluble big lineup against Philly. Probably nothing.