Vinny Fired;Vinny+Gar+Pax (?!) Press Conference @ 11AM today

[Professor Frink]

If Paxson knew Vinny was equally at fault, I kinda doubt they would be all chummy chum right now without Vinny doing his equal part to apologize in the same fashion. The leap of logic is that Paxson would volunteer to be the sole fall guy when there is no reason for him to fall on his sword for Vinny now that VDN no longer works for the Bulls.

Sure he would if he wanted the issue to just go away.

I meant his interview outside the Berto after Paxson and Gar talked.

Ah.

Apparently Paxson doesn't think Vinny is at fault either. Because he was ok with taking all the blame. Or else he just likes being shat on.

He wasn't taking all the blame. He was accepting responsibility for his actions. You're still making assumptions.

This is not exactly like discussing how bad Kirk Hinrich is at putting the ball in the hole.

As far as this issue is concerned, I'm far more interested in how it makes the team look and by extension, the Bulls chances to land new talent. And how it looks is bad.

How it looks is over. This is textbook PR. They issued their mea culpas, said their goodbyes. You don't know how it looks. You're just singing the same tune you always sing.

Plenty of opinion circulating in the media thought it was, thought that Paxson would never live through this incident.

And he hasn't really. He's a consultant now.

I wanted Paxson gone before this, so its just another log on the fire to me.

It's good to have a hobby.

[Professor Frink]

You may interpret it that way, but the national media hasn't.

Like Rerisen has argued, that's pretty much what matters.

Their attention span is pretty short. Once any comments are made about the press conference, quite shortly this should be the dead issue that it is.

+1

This is over for anyone not on this forum and not named Jay Marriotti. I bet he's knockin' em dead over this at whatever bar he holes up in during the day.

[kyrv]

You may interpret it that way, but the national media hasn't.

Like Rerisen has argued, that's pretty much what matters.

Their attention span is pretty short. Once any comments are made about the press conference, quite shortly this should be the dead issue that it is.

+1

This is over for anyone not on this forum and not named Jay Marriotti. I bet he's knockin' em dead over this at whatever bar he holes up in during the day.

Also I vote for a sticky, they have no time table for a coach and one may not be in place on July 1. I assume there will be the same freaking out as last time during the coaching search.

[Rerisen]

He wasn't taking all the blame. He was accepting responsibility for his actions. You're still making assumptions.

Like I indicated, discussing an alternative and extreme minority view of this topic just doesn’t interest me enough to be dragged in circles over and over about it.

If you think Paxson doesn’t have blame in the issue, hey more power to you.

The evidence for what happened (a physical altercation) and who is at blame (Paxson, by his own admission) has been presented both in the media and by Paxson who was there. You either choose to believe it or not.

[HomoSapien]

The one where we ended up with a guy who had never coached a game in his life. I think that freakout is justified.

[KingoftheCastle]

Is there a recorded video of this press conference up anywhere?

[Professor Frink]

Like I indicated, discussing an alternative and extreme minority view of this topic just doesn’t interest me enough to be dragged in circles over and over about it.

Nice dodge. I'm going over what is known and what is not known.

If you think Paxson doesn’t have blame in the issue, hey more power to you.

When did I ever say that?

The evidence for what happened (a physical altercation) and who is at blame (Paxson, by his own admission) has been presented both in the media and by Paxson who was there. You either choose to believe it or not.

Actually there is zero evidence. There is one side of the story leaked by Vinny's people and an apology by Pax that doesn't get into details. We have no evidence to work from. I don't know why you find that so hard to acknowledge.

[HomoSapien]

Why do you want to believe that the story we've been presented with isn't mostly true?

[kyrv]

The one where we ended up with a guy who had never coached a game in his life. I think that freakout is justified.

No, the freakout before the hire. OMG It's been 3 weeks! OMG it's been 3 weeks and one day.

Good times.

But now we know it may take a long time, so we will be patient.

[Rerisen]

So just for one last attempt at clarity, Frink, your position boiled down is that since no one in this forum was in the room, we can make no assumptions or conclusions about what happened there, despite the information that has come out.

Nor do any comments about the incident, even from the participants, have value, because hey, they could just be lying since its good PR.

For all we know aliens came down and pushed Del Negro and made a pretzel out of his tie. Personally I kinda doubt that though, and I kinda doubt Paxson did nothing out of line.

Did Vinny react in kind and defend himself? I think its certainly possible, and if so, understandable, but still leaves the black mark considerably on Pax if he was the one that escalated it and put his hands on Vinny. Which appears to be what everyone is accepting all the way up the Bulls chain of command.

[Professor Frink]

Why do you want to believe that the story we've been presented with isn't mostly true?

The story we've been presented with is incomplete. It is one side. Usually there are two sides to every story. I'm saying that you guys are making a lot of assumptions, assumptions that conveniently support your view of Pax as some kind of monster. The fact is you're passing judgement based on hearsay. Would you consider that a good quality? I don't.

[Rerisen]

Why do you want to believe that the story we've been presented with isn't mostly true?

What boggles belief is not that what he is saying couldn't potentially be true (the evidence is at odds with the truth) but rather that if it wasn't true, that the Bulls would just let a misleading recount of the incident hang in the air and possibly harm the franchise, due to Paxson eating the blame and looking like someone who can't control himself in the front office.

That is the part that you can't get down your throat to swallow.

[HomoSapien]

Why do you want to believe that the story we've been presented with isn't mostly true?

The story we've been presented with is incomplete. It is one side. Usually there are two sides to every story. I'm saying that you guys are making a lot of assumptions, assumptions that conveniently support your view of Pax as some kind of monster. The fact is you're passing judgement based on hearsay. Would you consider that a good quality? I don't.

Please, I don't want anything to support that view. I'd much rather believe that Vinny is some lunatic that attacked Paxson. Why would I want it to be the other way?

Paxson has flaws, but I think he's a solid. If Paxson is gone, then that means Foreman is in charge and I think that would be awful for this franchise.

[Professor Frink]

So just for one last attempt at clarity, Frink, your position boiled down is that since no one in this forum was in the room, we can make no assumptions or conclusions about what happened there, despite the information that has come out.

I'm saying we can't know anything for sure and that it is wrong to conclude that Vinny played no part in this. You don't know. You don't.

Nor do any comments about the incident, even from the participants, have value, because hey, they could just be lying since its good PR.

Or TWO PEOPLE COULD VIEW THE SAME EVENT DIFFERENTLY.

For all we know aliens came down and pushed Del Negro and made a pretzel out of his tie. Personally I kinda doubt that though, and I kinda doubt Paxson did nothing out of line.

I know for a fact that I never said Paxson did nothing out of line. Read what I wrote for once.

Did Vinny react in kind and defend himself? I think its certainly possible, and if so, understandable, but still leaves the black mark considerably on Pax if he was the one that escalated it and put his hands on Vinny. Which appears to be what everyone is accepting all the way up the Bulls chain of command.

Did Vinny, not realizing it, assume a threatening posture. Did he approach Pax while screaming before Pax shoved him? Did he goad Pax into shoving him? Did he make some kind of insensitive personal comment? Who was in the room when it happened? What are their names? Do they have an agenda? These are all reasonable questions that you haven't bothered to ask, nor will you b/c it doesn't support your view of Pax.

[Rerisen]

This is what this incident looks like to everyone who isn't vested in defending John Paxson - And nor do I mean by people that are vested against JP either, but just general fans of the NBA, players, coaches, media around the league - That the original story happened in some fashion (Paxson pushed/grabbed/attempted to punch Vinny) and then later apologized for it, thus accepting the narrative of the story that is out there.

This is now the view of the situation the Bulls are ok with letting stand.

If this is *not* really what happened, I do not believe at all that the team would be ok with that perception standing.

[HomoSapien]

So just for one last attempt at clarity, Frink, your position boiled down is that since no one in this forum was in the room, we can make no assumptions or conclusions about what happened there, despite the information that has come out.

Nor do any comments about the incident, even from the participants, have value, because hey, they could just be lying since its good PR.

For all we know aliens came down and pushed Del Negro and made a pretzel out of his tie. Personally I kinda doubt that though, and I kinda doubt Paxson did nothing out of line.

Did Vinny react in kind and defend himself? I think its certainly possible, and if so, understandable, but still leaves the black mark considerably on Pax if he was the one that escalated it and put his hands on Vinny. Which appears to be what everyone is accepting all the way up the Bulls chain of command.

Sounds about right to me.

[Professor Frink]

Please, I don't want anything to support that view. I'd much rather believe that Vinny is some lunatic that attacked Paxson. Why would I want it to be the other way?

You know this kind of sarcasm is like a white flag. It's what people resort to when they don't have a reasonable retort.

[HomoSapien]

Please, I don't want anything to support that view. I'd much rather believe that Vinny is some lunatic that attacked Paxson. Why would I want it to be the other way?

You know this kind of sarcasm is like a white flag. It's what people resort to when they don't have a reasonable retort.

That wasn't sarcasm.


(neither is this post, btw)

[Professor Frink]

This is what this incident looks like to everyone who isn't vested in defending John Paxson

You speak for everyone not vested in defending John Paxson?

- And nor do I mean by people that are vested against JP either, but just general fans of the NBA, players, coaches, media around the league - That the original story happened in some fashion (Paxson pushed/grabbed/attempted to punch Vinny) and then later apologized for it, thus accepting the narrative of the story that is out there.

And putting the issue to bed. This is textbook PR. Few people are going to obsess about this like you are.

This is now the view of the situation the Bulls are ok with letting stand.

You mean go away, because that's what will happen outside of this bulletin board.

If this is *not* really what happened, I do not believe at all that the team would be ok with that perception standing.

That's because you don't get that fighting the issue would only make it persist as a topic of conversation ... among people who matter. They're putting this to bed.

[Professor Frink]

Please, I don't want anything to support that view. I'd much rather believe that Vinny is some lunatic that attacked Paxson. Why would I want it to be the other way?

You know this kind of sarcasm is like a white flag. It's what people resort to when they don't have a reasonable retort.

That wasn't sarcasm.


(neither is this post, btw)

Ok, my apologies. I read you post wrong.