Off Topic IV

Post #941 » by **fatlever** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:45 pm

i agree. its just so hard to compare pre-ABA NBA and pre-fully integrated NBA with the post-ABA and post integrated NBA. post 1977, retired and current. would be a blast. for current players, you still have to pick a year. for example, if you pick duncan you dont have to take duncan of today, you can take duncan of 2002.

captaincrunk · Post #942 » by **captaincrunk** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:49 pm

fatlever wrote:i agree. its just so hard to compare pre-ABA NBA and pre-fully integrated NBA with the post-ABA and post integrated NBA. post 1977, retired and current. would be a blast. for current players, you still have to pick a year. for example, if you pick duncan you dont have to take duncan of today, you can take duncan of 2002.

sounds good to me. We pretty much did that off the record with the last one, when we posted the notable stats.

Post #943 » by **fatlever** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:00 am

continuing the stern rome discussion.

i just read the transcript of the interview. wow. intense. fair question by rome. he is right, people do wonder. stern didnt need to make the wife-beater comment. i get that he feels disrespected by the claim, because its basically people calling him a liar and a cheater. but, he is delusional if he doesnt at least understand why the conspiracy exists.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball- ... --nba.html

Post #944 » by **BigSlam** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:31 am

fatlever wrote:continuing the stern rome discussion.

i just read the transcript of the interview. wow. intense. fair question by rome. he is right, people do wonder. stern didnt need to make the wife-beater comment. i get that he feels disrespected by the claim, because its basically people calling him a liar and a cheater. but, he is delusional if he doesnt at least understand why the conspiracy exists.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball- ... --nba.html

Stern came off as a grade A a-hole.

When he asked Rome if he had stopped beating his wife yet I wish Rome had said:

"Major difference between our two questions is that my wife has never had a black eye yet the NBA owned New Orleans Hornets have the 1st overall pick - which is pretty much a metaphoric black eye to the other 29 NBA teams and all of the fans outside of Hornets fans".

Post #945 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:40 am

"I don't think so," Stern said. "Number one, we sold it. We're gonna close this week. We already have established our price. I think that if it had gone to Michael Jordan, which was the next team up with, in terms of a high percentage, they would've said, 'Oh, David's taking care of his friend Michael.' And if it had gone to Brooklyn, which is going into Barclay Center, it would have been fair to speculate, I suppose, that we want to take Brooklyn off of the mat. So there was no winning. And people write about it, and it's OK to write about it, and we sort of expect it, but that's not a question that I've been asked before by a respectable journalist."

I mean, he's right.

Post #946 » by **BigSlam** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:48 am

Walt Cronkite wrote:
"I don't think so," Stern said. "Number one, we sold it. We're gonna close this week. We already have established our price. I think that if it had gone to Michael Jordan, which was the next team up with, in terms of a high percentage, they would've said, 'Oh, David's taking care of his friend Michael.' And if it had gone to Brooklyn, which is going into Barclay Center, it would have been fair to speculate, I suppose, that we want to take Brooklyn off of the mat. So there was no winning. And people write about it, and it's OK to write about it, and we sort of expect it, but that's not a question that I've been asked before by a respectable journalist."

I mean, he's right.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think the thing is rigged at all and it's almost a no win situation for the NBA but that doesn't excuse Stern coming across as a complete and utter douche bag.

He strikes me as the type who can dish it out but really gets his back up if someone serves it up to him and his passive aggressiveness only underlines it for me.

Post #947 » by **Walt Cronkite** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:43 am

Fair enough.

Post #948 » by **floppymoose** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:53 am

wait, we had the whole lockout to figure Stern out. People are catching on only now?

TheKingofSting · Post #949 » by **TheKingofSting** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:11 am

fatlever wrote:
Kemba2Hendo wrote:For fats or Slam:

Will we be having a Scavenger Hunt this off-season?

absolutely. the questions is, should we do a current player scavenger hunt, another retro scavenger hunt or both? i am partial to the retro scavenger hunt personally. i think this year i'd limit it to players who entered the league in 1977 (post ABA merger) or later, so we can get more random 80s and 90s guys.

we will start in July.

Excellent, I kind of like that idea as well.

Det the Threat · Post #950 » by **Det the Threat** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:52 am

captaincrunk wrote:
fatlever wrote:350 mil price for griz

sold to this guy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Pera

he is a west coast dude. anyone hear anything about him trying to move team? just curious.

The grizz are the only NBA team within about 400 driving miles. There's a huge area there really. If they go, I think a team might be put in Louisville, Kentucky, who have been talking about getting an NBA quality arena and working towards getting a team.

EDIT: The article on realgm also says he doesn't intend to move it so I'd go with that.

If they really go, I hope it's to Seattle and that this guy's part of Chris Hanson's team that's still not totally known.
The city/county will decide on the plan of Hanson this summer and he just told the city/county of three of his ten members on that group.
Those three are the Nordstrom brothers and Steve Ballmer, which should tell everyone how serious and wealthy that group is.
Also, the mayor of Seattle also visited with Stern last week or so and talked about how Seattle wants an NBA team and Stern aknowledged before the Finals started that he had a nice chat with him.

Jaruff · Post #951 » by **Jaruff** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:10 am

The easiest way to get a team back in Seattle would be to extend the league another two teams to match the NFL. Create the Sonics and a franchise somewhere else and move the Grizzlies to the Eastern Conference. Las Vegas would be a great spot even though the league won't approve it due to gambling concerns. Everyone wins.

captaincrunk · Post #952 » by **captaincrunk** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:44 am

BigSlam wrote:
fatlever wrote:continuing the stern rome discussion.

i just read the transcript of the interview. wow. intense. fair question by rome. he is right, people do wonder. stern didnt need to make the wife-beater comment. i get that he feels disrespected by the claim, because its basically people calling him a liar and a cheater. but, he is delusional if he doesnt at least understand why the conspiracy exists.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball- ... --nba.html

Stern came off as a grade A a-hole.

When he asked Rome if he had stopped beating his wife yet I wish Rome had said:

"Major difference between our two questions is that my wife has never had a black eye yet the NBA owned New Orleans Hornets have the 1st overall pick - which is pretty much a metaphoric black eye to the other 29 NBA teams and all of the fans outside of Hornets fans".

Rome was being a bit of a cock. It's like asking a businessman "So, everyone wants to know, how badly did you cheat on your taxes eh?"

Even if you really think that guy cheated, you can't expect a good result in asking. It was really, really god damned stupid of Rome. Nothing good could have come of it.

EDIT: I can call Rome a bit of a cock right? and stupid?

captaincrunk · Post #953 » by **captaincrunk** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:46 am

Det the Threat wrote:
captaincrunk wrote:
fatlever wrote:350 mil price for griz

sold to this guy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Pera

he is a west coast dude. anyone hear anything about him trying to move team? just curious.

The grizz are the only NBA team within about 400 driving miles. There's a huge area there really. If they go, I think a team might be put in Louisville, Kentucky, who have been talking about getting an NBA quality arena and working towards getting a team.

EDIT: The article on realgm also says he doesn't intend to move it so I'd go with that.

If they really go, I hope it's to Seattle and that this guy's part of Chris Hanson's team that's still not totally known.

I didn't mean that Memphis would go to Kentucky, I meant that Kentucky might be able to field an expansion team, or take another one.

Battery · Post #954 » by **Battery** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:15 am

I like David Stern but I think he was wrong in this instance. Actually I don't believe him because he came across as very defensive. Someone in his position should have been more professional with the way he answered the questions, and because he came across as being on the defensive, it made it look like he has something to hide. I can't stand Jim Rome, but I thought he was right to ask those questions, especially pointing out that the NBA owned the Hornets and it was in their best interest to see them get the #1 pick.

I'm not saying it was rigged, but Stern's answers lead me to believe he wasn't being truthful. Now the Knicks getting the #1 pick in 1985, that was definitely rigged. Not sure here, but I'm suspicious.

captaincrunk · Post #955 » by **captaincrunk** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:19 am

Why is it okay to publicly ask a man if he's a complete liar on a friendly radio interview, but it would be in bad taste to do the exact same thing to someone not named David Stern?

advanced · Post #956 » by **advanced** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:13 pm

lol Rome was doing Stern a favor trying to lob him a softie and Stern completely misread the situation, overreacted, and got all butthurt defensive when he realized it. The loaded question thing was a dumb response because...it wasnt a loaded question, Rome set up him to let him give a professional answer, theyd laugh off the notion and hopefully change a few conspiracy theorists minds. But Stern managed to even screw that up and give them more fuel by acting like such a douche.

He'd rather have attention than credibility.

captaincrunk · Post #957 » by **captaincrunk** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:58 pm

advanced wrote:lol Rome was doing Stern a favor trying to lob him a softie and Stern completely misread the situation, overreacted, and got all butthurt defensive when he realized it. The loaded question thing was a dumb response because...it wasnt a loaded question, Rome set up him to let him give a professional answer, theyd laugh off the notion and hopefully change a few conspiracy theorists minds. But Stern managed to even screw that up and give them more fuel by acting like such a douche.

He'd rather have attention than credibility.

I'm sorry to inform you that you're entirely wrong on every part of this post.

Firstly, He answered it by saying "no". There's nothing more that can be done with that question if you're David Stern. That's not good interviewing.

Good interviewing would have been like:

"Now we've all heard the different conspiracy theories, that the lottery is fixed, that the Hornets won because they were owned by the NBA, all of that. What do you think when you hear things like that?"

To which they could have talked about for a good solid 3-5 minutes. Rome instead decided to just say "so did you rig it or not?" which is pretty useless. Even if it WAS rigged, what answer did he really expect?

Secondly, he was answering foolish dickery with a classic example of the same.

from wiki

"The term "loaded question" is sometimes used to refer to loaded language that is phrased as a question. This type of question does not necessarily contain a fallacious presupposition, but rather this usage refers to the question having an unspoken and often emotive implication. For example, "Are you a murderer?" would be such a loaded question, as "murder" has a very negative connotation. Such a question may be asked merely to harass or upset the respondent with no intention of listening to their reply, or asked with the full expectation that the respondent will predictably deny it."

That's what Rome was doing.

advanced · Post #958 » by **advanced** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:22 pm

I think you misunderstood me more than Stern misunderstood Rome :lol:

re-read and try again

captaincrunk · Post #959 » by **captaincrunk** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:35 pm

But you're just plain wrong. He wasn't lobbed a "softie". If you read the first part of my post you'll know that. It also WAS a loaded question. If you read the second part of my post you'll know that.

Simply put by asking the question like he did, he accused Stern of being a liar and a cheat and a greedy, greedy man. By asking the question on a radio broadcast like that, he legitimized those claims, true or not.

Battery · Post #960 » by **Battery** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:02 am

captaincrunk wrote:Why is it okay to publicly ask a man if he's a complete liar on a friendly radio interview, but it would be in bad taste to do the exact same thing to someone not named David Stern?

After reading your comments, I need to listen to the interview again. Perhaps I wasn't paying close attention to how Rome asked the initial question, but paid more attention to Stern's answer. Either way, I still think Stern should have been more professional about it, even though Rome is a jerk. But Stern knew that ahead of time so he has to be prepared for loaded questions. I don't know how anyone can listen to Rome for more than a minute. Sounds like a typical unprofessional Californian douche bag.

Stern's line about calling Stephen A. Smith next was hilarious. :lol:

At least with Stephen A, he always starts off a tough question with "you know your my boy and I love you really much love lots of love I've always loved you and will still love you but, and pardon me if I'm mistaken or out of line for asking this because I love you but..."