User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.7519 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
That's the exact lineup I've been saying the Jazz should have been starting the whole season. I have no idea why Corbin screwed around with Bell, Howard, and Miles for so long. Why can't professional coaches read this site and base their decisions on my opinions more often? :)
Bynum got 4 for the Barea play, and he had the previous play against Beasley on his "record." 4 seems right to me, particularly since it will include playoff games. MWP has been playing better lately, so although it worked out for the Lakers today, they would miss him some in the 1st round. And, to deal with another question, no, I don't think his past should affect what the league does about it, unless there is some rule that specifically applies.
The Thunder are yappy and demonstrative when they get on runs, and no fun to lose to--recall Matt venting about that after the last Bulls/Thunder game. The game was a little chippy. Doesn't mean you can throw an elbow at a guy's head.
As to intent, MWP was out of control and swung his elbow in a dangerous manner, so I think he should get a suspension. I will leave the issues of how much malice he had in his heart when he did it and how judgmental to get about it to the media guys and anyone here who wants to go there.
___
Big thing for the Lakers today was Jordan Hill and to a lesser extent, Ebanks. Kobe, although he was only 9/26, deserves credit for a lot of things he did--making some big shots late, playing some good D, 8 assists. The Lakers don't play again until Thursday, and if the Clippers lose Tue in ATL or Wed in NY, (I am assuming the Clippers will win tonight) the Lakers won't need to win the Thursday game in Sacto to be the 3 seed, so they were right to go all-out to knock off OKC.
Today's game increased the chances of OKC and the Lakers meeting in RD 2. And I think it may be a minor indicator about the Spurs and the Thunder. Doesn't change the Lakers outlook, other than it may get Hill in the playoff rotation, which will help a little.
Wow. I disagree with that. Your past should affect discipline. I'm glad the NHL threw Torres out of the playoffs. He's out of control. And if MWP has a history of being unable to control himself, it should count in the discipline.
100% agree. And it was 100% intentional - no idea why though. He fully cocked his arm - and only the one time when he hit Harden. He also looked ready to throw down when Ibaka and Westbrook came yelling at him. I'll be shocked if it's less than 5 games (the Bynum recent suspension being the closest comp), but wouldn't be surprised if it was as high as 10.
You gotta hand it to the Wizards, they haven't been trying to tank the last week* (although looking at the standings, they were kinda in that spot no matter what they did). I saw they were the only team to win in Chicago and Miami this year - extenuating circumstances, of course, but still not too shabby. Bulls magic number is 1, even if they lose at Ind they'll beat the Cavs to close out the year. Today the door almost closed on the Thunder getting the 1 out West.
good to see the sixers still have some fight left in them. that was a hell of a win.
Indeed; that's the Sixers that can cause the Bulls problems in the first round. Indiana would have clinched the 3 seed with the win. It was also the first 3pt or less win for the Sixers all season.
*Or they have been, and they just suck at that too.
And the Gerald Wallace play that sent Wallace to the hospital with broken ribs a few years earlier.
And, to deal with another question, no, I don't think his past should affect what the league does about it, unless there is some rule that specifically applies.
I don't know if there's a rule, but I think the league definitely should take past history into account. Players who are routinely reckless or dirty (and I'm not saying MWP is) should be looked at a little closer than those with a single fluke incident.
i don't see artest as being dirty, i see him more as being impulsive and crazy. i don't think he knew that he did what he did, and i think his posturing with ibaka was a result of that.
that said, whether the intent was there or not, you can't have a guy throwing elbows at other players' heads. he deserves to get dinged, but i don't think his past behavior should be a multiplier on whatever discipline comes down. i could be wrong, but i don't think he's ever been the kind of goon that we've seen in the NHL playoffs, where he's actively and purposefully going after the head of an opposing player with an intent to injure.
I really disagree. World Peace wasn't even looking at Harden. I don't think it was intentional at all. Look at World Peace as he runs down the floor and Ibaka goes after him. He doesn't even know what it's about.
The last game, and at least the first two playoff games would be an appropriate suspension. Maybe three playoff games.
If there is a rule about it, in writing, sure--like if this is his X flagrant in a certain period of time and that means he gets Y games, or if there is something about "blows to the head and neck" etc. Presumably, the league should have clearly written policies in place to guide the process. If they don't, and someone just looks at replays and decides what to do, that is just another example of Stern and his bobos having too much discretionary power.
So, if it is just, "That crazy Ron Artest is loose again and needs to be stopped", then, no. Rules in all organizations need to be enforced consistently and impersonally. I agree with STEAGLES on this one.
Bynum, as one of the many ever-vigilant LakerHaters here just re-reminded us, has ISTM more of a recent history of this sort of stuff than MWP does (although he got dinged in the playoffs last year as well) and he got 4 with no playoff games. The Malice at the Palace was a long time ago.
Do you watch the Lakers much? That's his trick - he does something dirty, or chippy, or designed to tick the other guy off, but he never looks at the guy when he does it - that's his out. Then he pulls the "Who? What? Me?" act as if it's completely random that he happens to get tangled up with a guy or his arms get wrapped around someone's face or his elbow lands on someone's head once or twice a game, while somehow no one else in the league has this problem. Artest is loopy, but he's also smart - he understands human behavior very well, that's his entire psychological game on the court with getting in people's heads and ticking them off. No eye contact = no intent, even if he does it over and over.
i could be wrong, but i don't think he's ever been the kind of goon that we've seen in the NHL playoffs, where he's actively and purposefully going after the head of an opposing player with an intent to injure.
He swiftly we forget. He was suspended just last year in the playoffs for clotheslining J.J. Barea in the face.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkjQNz1gt0g
Then, just in case, he leaves his hand on his face just to really tick him off, which he always does - keeps physical contact well past the point when it's necessary or even part of the natural motion. It's a dominance thing. And he did the same thing - hardly looks at him. That's his trick. He's a smart dude.
Hmmm. This is a good point. World Peace does like to pull that trick. I guess he'll probably be suspended. What is Harden doing running into him, though?
Question: if Harden commits a hard foul on a Laker in the playoffs, does an announcer say, "You know what's really responsible for this cycle of violence is World Peace. None of this would have happened if it weren't for World Peace starting it."
I had OKC as one of my League Pass teams this year; Harden does that sort of thing quite a bit--it is a little "trick" of his own. Looked like he was just trying to get the inbounds in that case, however. Doesn't matter in any case, though. Like I said, an elbow to the head is an elbow to the head, no matter who is throwing it or why.
This will add some drama if the Lakers play OKC in RD 2.
I don't think any of the major sports commissioners have ever been shy about the fact that they hold enormous discretionary power.
If you're referring to me, you were the one who brought up Bynum's history in post#1207. I just expanded upon your own point. :)
Bynum didn't get suspended for playoff games because it happened in an elimination game and there were no more playoff games to suspend him from. It's a different situation here with World Peace. If he gets multiple games and they happen to run into the playoffs, well, that's just bad timing, I guess.
As far as past actions come into play, one of the standards for using past crimes in punishment for current crimes in the judicial system is whether the characteristics of a past crime tend to make it more likely that the accused his guilty of this crime. A common example is an MO like a serial killer leaving a flower at the crime scene. That would seemingly be a tough call, but if what Squash and tshipman said is true, Metta has a history of no look violence in order to establish plausible deniability. That would seemingly make (a) and (b) more likely, so it will probably be considered.
Considering all of that, I think it would be appropriate to suspend him for the equivalent of the first round. Interestingly, he is really most important (and arguably only truly useful, though I think he's been above that level lately) against elite offensive 3s. They will need him against Durant and Lebron, to be certain. Neither Dallas nor Denver is overly dependent on one wing scorer.
The problem for the Lakers, if he is gone for any length of time, is their utter lack of depth. He's been playing well lately, and anyone outside of their big 3 + Sessions performing anywhere near average is a huge boon. So while a specific matchup might seem more difficult without him, there's still a big drop off from what he's been lately to whomever is going to take his minutes.
That's true in many respects, but Barnes and Ebanks can actually do a couple of things MWP can't. They will miss his defense; if they play Denver, it will help Gallinari. Whether it swings the series remains to be seen.
Stern and Silver aren't "the judicial system." They're Owners' Representatives, involved in overseeing a business and representing the interests of management in that business. Not sure who is in the group (if there is one) that decides these things, but there should be former players involved, and I assume NBPA is allowed to appeal suspensions.
They're not. That is why I said MWP taking a big hit here is fine with me if it is in the rules based on his track record and what he did ("blows to the head and neck"), outlined in very specific terms. OTOH, if it is just an official Sternian version of guys posting at ESPN.com saying stuff like, "We need to send that crazy punk a message for the sake of the children", then, no, I am not behind a longer suspension than Bynum got.
I did happen to go see Humber's perfect game, though. Even if it is a different sport.
I don't mean to say that the league is or should be beholden to those rules, but that there is very relevant precedent for incorporatng history into both factual determination and sentencing. I agree with you that the business interest ultimately governs, and that still has to incorporate a sense of "justice" to appease fans who want to see stars without feeling like the game is brutally violent or out of control.
I agree with the premise there.
While Fisher seems like an ass (he definitely plays like one), he doesn't have near as much to lose here as Hunter. Hunter's fighting to save his job and reputation, which makes me think he's hiding and covering up stuff.
Not that I can remember. Vescey has always been right up there with Stephen A. Smith on my all time list of least favorite sports personalities. If I ever debated with Smith in person, I think I'd eventually just agree with everything he said just so he'd stop yelling at me.
Punishments for deliberate acts, especially acts outside the context of a play, should address the potential harm to the player (and ultimately the league), not just the actual harm.
As an internal auditor, my internal alarm system is going berserk at Hunter's response to the request. There's just so many red flags that I would be shocked if something significantly rotten wasn't going on that Hunter is hoping to keep quiet. Pointing out Fisher's post-playing career ambitions as a possible conflict of interest is fair (and could be true), but just calling for an audit isn't going to secure his future, so that doesn't really deflect any extreme suspicion that I now have towards Hunter (and the executive committee).
Artest does do that crap all the time, where he pretends to not know what he's doing as he's draped all over a guy or gives a little shove in the back.
This time, his "innocent" little elbow happened to land square and his "what me?!" act was exposed in the slow mo replay, where he clearly loaded up and swung recklessly.
I'd suspend him for the rest of the year and make it clear to him that he's one more serious altercation away from a season long ban.
That said, there are a lot of elbows thrown in the NBA, 90% of them land a glancing blow or hit air as guys get out of the way. Watch any rebound in traffic or perimeter player as he swings the ball up -- elbows out -- as you are taught. Those elbows are part of the game and accepted as such.
Artest's elbow, as he was running up court and not involved with the ball, was reckless, not at all part of the game, and should be treated as such.
__________
Lovely weekend for Chicago. Rose plays unexpectedly (hey, a game time decision that actually was!) and Miami loses with Wade going down in the process.
I see that Philly and NY would rather play Chicago than Miami. Good, bring 'em on. Rose is getting healthy. Deng said his wrist is feeling good, and Rip is looking like 2006 Rip. This team is on a mission. Only more injuries can derail a matchup with the Heat in the ECF.
In fact, I'm going to go ahead and guarantee, barring any more serious injuries for either side, that when all is said and done, it will be Mia and Chi meeting up here in 3 or so weeks. None of the other teams in the East are ready to run, even if their fans are thrilled they are no longer crawling.
Way to go out on a limb.
I'd rather the Knicks draw Miami. You're going to have to beat them to get out of the East anyway, and I think they're most beatable early. Once they get going they'll be tougher.
My perception of the msm coverage the last month is that Chicago and Miami are now seen as "probable" for the ECF instead of stone cold locks. I'd like to say they are stone cold locks barring major injuries.
Not exactly going out on a limb, but just affirming what I feel.
Link. Yeah, that's a big red flag.
Not sure what to think about stuff about Fish going behind union board's back. A certain level of "feeling things out" is necessary in a negotiation, but if he made promises, that obviously crossed the line. I wouldn't really believe anything that Hunter is likely to be leaking about Fish, though. Fish has way more credibility (imo) than Hunter does--just one relative has the appearance of impropriety, but several? Contracts out to bid won by relatives? That stinks something awful.
Well, it's a history/context thing. You can make a case that all the penalities should be a lot more severe for this sort of thing. Jason Smith got two games for what he did.
As it should be, although of course we don't know who the "neutral" reviewers are.
This is an interesting point. It came up in the NHL too, with the Torres suspension. He got 25 games starting in the postseason. So for every additional game the Coyotes play in the playoffs this year, that's one fewer regular season game he sits next year and doesn't lose a paycheck for. Kind of a weird loophole.
It took the NHL all season and most of the first round of the postseason to notice that one or two (or even five) games isn't enough of a deterrent.
I don't see how that's fair for Fisher at all. The fact that Hunter et al is trying to use the audit as a negotiating tool is ridiculous. If there's something that needs to be uncovered, Fisher is doing his job by trying to bring it out and if he were to be punished/lose out for doing his duties is absurd.
Like I said before, I don't see how an audit necessarily enhances Fisher's ambitions, beyond the fact that he's doing what he should be doing and cleaning things up. If that somehow leads to him taking on a larger role post-career, that should only be seen as a good thing. No reasonable audit is going to result in a promotion for Fisher.
But if the audit proves Fisher right, he'd still be out of his job.
Chris Paul's name is being bandied about as the one to replace Fisher if it comes to that.
Edit- in other words, I don't see any reason to presume that Hunter is guilty while also presuming that Fisher is innocent. The audit should be done either way, but at very least, an investigation into Fisher's role in the negotiations should accompany it.
Don't they still get home court as the #4 seed? I don't think they are being rewarded, considering if they had passed Indiana they'd get to face Orlando without Howard.
No, home court goes to the team with the best record.
Well, there's how he's vehemently protesting against an independent audit and that he apparently employs multiple relatives, but no, besides that there isn't a shred of evidence of bad faith.
I see no reason why Hunter can't ask for an investigation into Fisher. I couldn't care less about rumors on either end. However, Fisher seems to be looking for proof while Hunter just wants Fisher's head. At least one of them appears to be following some sort of reasonable process.
Another possibility is that Fisher was actually negotiating in better faith than Hunter, perhaps that's something an audit would uncover.
Fisher's timing is, to put it mildly, strange. There's simply no reason for Fisher to want to do this right before the playoffs start.
Sure, could be fishy. Or could be he just found something now or was feeling the push out the door starting.
We can't speak to either guy's motives, but I at least initially am siding with the guy who appears to be handling it the more professional way.
Somewhat unrelated, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine that calling for an audit equates to someone losing a job in most people's minds.
Right. And I meant rewarded in a karmic sense. The reward being the Hawks undermanned due to Horford's slow recovery. At the time the C's tanked their last game, they still had a chance at getting HCA in round 1 (and a microscopic chance at the 3 seed) and decided it was irrelevant.
Hunter does not look clean. In fact, I think he is probably guilty of cronyism. I don't know about the rest of it.
On the other hand, the sequence of events is being swept aside and seems relevant. Hunter and other union people were complaining about Fisher's power grab during the summer. Fisher's complaints about Hunter came as a response. That doesn't indicate that his hands are clean. Hunter has been indignant, and that might have something to do with someone who has already been (according to him) disloyal to his position and his superiors making a Tyrion Lanister-style political ploy.
In the big picture, I think Hunter hiring a family member does far less damage to the average member of the bargaining unit than if Fisher betrayed his fiduciary duty to the membership.
If those multiple family members aren't qualified for those positions or were given responsibilities beyond their abilities, it may have also compromised the union leadership's duties. Fisher, while representing the players, is also part of that union. Whether or not he was making a power grab, he would be in a unique position to evaluate whether or not Hunter and his cronies were doing what the union (and Fisher directly) was paying them to do.
And again, he's asking for an independent review while Hunter et al aren't. That carries a ton of weight IMO.
Good thing Henry Abbot is on the case!
Edit:
It has to do with the credibility of the charge and the motivations of the person making it. On the one hand, you have a very serious charge that is almost impossible to prove: Fisher making an end run around the union and agreeing to a deal that labor had not signed off on. In the end, however, the deal being signed ended up being really similar to what had been discussed, with no big surprises for the players.
On the other hand, Hunter is being charged with something that is easily independently verified, and something that the initial view of at least, seems to indicate that there's some smoke there.
So, on the one hand, you have an impossible to prove allegation that has resulted in zero harm. On the other hand, you have an easy to prove allegation that has resulted in direct harm. That's why I take the Hunter stuff more seriously.
What other sports?
and from last page
As much as people want to say Billups is underrated, I think Ginobili is easily the most underrated star of the post Jordan era. His per minute production is on par with Kobe Bryant. Obviously Kobe is better because durability is important, but someone like Pierce isn't in his class and its not like Ginobili doesn't have team success at both the professional and international level to back up his quality, to me he isn't inner cirlce, but he is an easy, no brainer hall famer, not at all borderline (and so Billups).
Someone pointed out they should change the wording to a division winner is guaranteed a top 5 seed, because in reality that's what's happening. As to why, who knows. It's the actual 3 seed, with HCA, in the NHL (see the Coyotes/Blackhawks series, for instance).
The process matters, and Fisher is doing it the right way (based on what we actually know). Fisher is not an employee of the union, he's part of the union. That matters some, too.
It's a lot easier to have superstar per-minute production when you only play 31 minutes. Maybe Manu is just at the front end of the revolution, but you cannot just look at his per-minute production--it obscures a lot of the facts.
I think because tanking is more prominent in the NBA, or at least it is perceived as so. My sense is that MLB teams don't tank very much, probably because an extra draft position or two doesn't make as big of an impact as it does in the NBA. In the NHL, meanwhile, almost every team is in the playoff hunt until the end of the season, and just squeaking into the playoffs in the NHL gives you a reasonable chance. A #1 seed has lost in the first round four times in NBA history; we're one game away from having it happen twice in the NHL this season. That probably encourages mid-level NHL teams to go for it instead of tanking.
Agreed. It's not as extreme as the closer/starter per inning production rates in MLB, but it's the same basic idea.
Pierce isn't in his class and its not like Ginobili doesn't have team success at both the professional and international level to back up his quality, to me he isn't inner cirlce, but he is an easy, no brainer hall famer, not at all borderline (and so Billups).
Based on the current standards for the basketball HOF and the fact that they consider international play in their selections, maybe Manu is an obvious HOFer. When I called him borderline I was going off per game numbers, all star selections, MVP votes, etc. My personal HOF would be NBA specific and much smaller than the real one, but it's hard to predict what the actual basketball HOF is going to do sometimes.
I think this is it. The marginal value is so high compared to the other sports.
Even in hockey, having the TWO best players in the league gets you a first round exit (and they had their asses handed to them, too). When's the last time a team with the best player in the NBA in his prime lost in the first round?
Dirk won the MVP and lost in the first round in 2007.
Garnett had an argument for being the best in 2003.
If it was that easy, more people would be doing consistently.
Obviously minutes played is important, because someone else has to play those minutes, but if you look at a counting metric like Win Shares, Ginobili peaks are very close to Pierce's in far fewer minutes (enough to where even a modest backup easily makes up the difference and then some, a good player like Brent Barry backing him up goes well beyond that).
Right, but he wasn't the best player. He was just the easiest to write the post-MVP stories on.
For some reason, I thought you were talking about the Sedins at first. But man, it was nice to see them get their ass kicked.
That is a good point. We will see how the investigations develop and we will learn more about what actually happened over the last year or so. I am not making a final judgment, but I hope that Fisher's behavior gets some attention, too. I don't think conducting side negotiations is unprovable or harmless.
Right, but he wasn't the best player. He was just the easiest to write the post-MVP stories on.
Probably true, but I'm not completely sure who WAS the best player in 2007. There weren't really any obvious candidates.
I'd hate it for the Lakers, and I can imagine a lighter punishment, but I can also see the league making him go away for a while. Can't say I would blame them in that instance.
He led the league in PER and Win Shares, if he wasn't the best he was at least close. 2007 was a weird year, the other guys top 5 in those categories: Duncan (champs, probably the best player, but not his best season), Garnett (missed playoffs), Bryant (out first round), Nash (out second round after beating Lakers), James (one of his worst sesaons, but made finals in weak east).
2005 as well.
Chris Paul in 2009 was a pretty good player.
But that's just it--there are more guys who have superstar production in limited time than there are superstars who do it for a full 36-40 mpg. And again, 31.1 is Manu's career HIGH in minutes. His average is 27.9 mpg.
James Harden this year has a (slightly) higher WS/48 than Durant or Westbrook.
Tiago Splitter has a higher WS/48 than Andrew Bynum.
Chris Anderson is higher than Dwight Howard.
Are those accurate reflections of what would happen if those guys were playing the same minutes? It is a lot easier to put up superstar numbers in fewer minutes played.
Other than Harden (a great player this year) you're comparing him to guys aren't really comparable. Ginobili and Harden's per minute numbers are even better than guys like Splitter and Anderson and they also play more.
James Harden this year has a (slightly) higher WS/48 than Durant or Westbrook.
Tiago Splitter has a higher WS/48 than Andrew Bynum.
Chris Anderson is higher than Dwight Howard. Are those accurate reflections of what would happen if those guys were playing the same minutes? It is a lot easier to put up superstar numbers in fewer minutes played.
Maybe. I don't see why it's not possible. Harden's having an incredible year. Splitter is having a really good year, and is probably the best example to argue small sample size. Anderson (I assume you mean Ryan Anderson) is having a really good year. Probably an unsustainable year. So for a lot of these guys, my concern isn't that they didn't play a lot of minutes - it's that regardless of minutes they're likely playing over their head (except maybe Harden). Ginobili proved that is his level of production.
What's your argument, exactly? That he couldn't do it, or that it means that he may not have been able to play as many years?
Edit: The other problem I think is that the WS/48 is but one stat. Chris Andersen (who I now think you're talking about) and Splitter are good but not elite. Ginobili has elite TS% numbers, elite +/- numbers, he can handle high usage. I don't think those comparisons are very fair, on top of the fact that Ginobili has done this his whole career.
- does efficiency/value drop w higher minutes
I can think of reasons why this might or might not be true. I've seen a study (long ago) suggesting no effect.
- are strong performances by med minute players likely to be a fluke, due to the smaller sample size
Yes, though I think that's not what's up w Manu
****
I think the union should review fisher's work as well.
Manny Coon's statement was this:
Lots more guys are good at low minutes than are good at high minutes. Not all those guys are consistently good, although there are a few bigs who do. Most of the reason for that is that when you're good at lower minutes, you get more minutes. Guys like 2010-2011 Brandon Bass (.154 WS/48 in 26.1 MPG) turn into 2011-2012 Brandon Bass (.120 WS/48 in 31.9 MPG).
My argument is that Ginobili's per-minute production as a 36 MPG guy is an unknown, but much more likely to be worse than his production as a 29 MPG guy. Arguments that say that Ginobili should be considered a HOFer for his NBA play want me to believe that those minutes he spent off the court didn't make him fresher than staying on the court and playing defense. Everything we know about basketball implies that isn't the case. Admittedly, I haven't done an exhaustive study on it, but I don't find the argument for Ginobili as a HOFer persuasive. You're asking me to believe that Popovich, one of the best coaches of his generation, was wrong to think that Ginobili would lose efficiency if played heavier minutes.
I am always deeply, deeply skeptical of arguments about guys who were second bananas their whole career.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main