OT: The 2023 NBA season is off to a weird start.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by Jaybee

Not sure they'd win even at full strength. The Pels are really good this year. GS is in a weird place - the Steph-Klay-Wiggins-Dray-Looney lineup is something +24 pts/100 possessions which is ridiculous, but take even one of those guys off the floor and they just crater. This would of course bode well for the playoffs when your best players get more minutes, but they might be in a fight to make the playoffs come March at their current pace*.



*They won't be. They'll reel off some 8 out of 9 and 13 out of 17 stretches and be solidly in the 3rd-5th seed by the time the playoffs come. No need to prove themselves in the regular season at this point.

Exactly. The Dubs thrive on being an underdog. Their “B” team lost to a good Pelicans team by 11 points. Poole, Wiseman etc will find their footing. Hard not to see them representing the West again.

Meanwhile, the league’s handling of “L’Affaire Irving” continues to be an utter travesty.

[username]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Meanwhile, the league’s handling of “L’Affaire Irving” continues to be an utter travesty.

I'm not sure if I can ask this without seeming like I'm looking for a fight, which I'm genuinely not, but I'm curious what you think the league should do. I know what I think the Nets should do, but I think the league is in a real bind with this one, because they're caught between competing constituencies.

[username]

I should probably say that I think what the league has done so far has been a joke, but I don't have an especially clear sense what Silver could have done that would have been all of the following: a) better; b) legal; c) wouldn't have created a lousy precedent around freedom of expression; and d) wouldn't have alienated a significant portion of the players.

[Jaybee]

I think the CBA generally prefers that teams handle off-court incidents that don't rise to the level of criminality themselves. A quick perusal of suspensions and fines in the last several years (https://pr.nba.com/tag/nba-suspensions/) suggests that the league handles on court incidents and protects their refs. Some notable exceptions are Willie Green's suspension for domestic violence and the Arenas-Crittendon gun thing from 2009. I'll be curious to see what Charlotte does, if anything, now that Bridges has pleaded no contest (but is also not under contract??). Teams are usually left to handle awkward PR incidents by themselves. I think username is right that the league would be on tenuous contractual grounds to punish Irving - that said, there were almost certainly backchannel discussions that pushed the Nets into the suspension.

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

[/B]

Exactly. The Dubs thrive on being an underdog. Their “B” team lost to a good Pelicans team by 11 points. Poole, Wiseman etc will find their footing. Hard not to see them representing the West again.

Meanwhile, the league’s handling of “L’Affaire Irving” continues to be an utter travesty.

Assuming everyone stays healthy, which is a terrible assumption, it's not hard at all for me to imagine Phoenix, Memphis, Dallas, GS or Denver in the Finals. And I don't have a great feeling about the Clips and whether Kawhi will play meaningful basketball again, but if they can put their whole team together for a month or two before the real games start, they should be worrisome too. The Pels are really good, but have some learning to do. Next year is their year.

If I had to pick one of those right now... Dallas, with Memphis a close second.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by username

I should probably say that I think what the league has done so far has been a joke, but I don't have an especially clear sense what Silver could have done that would have been all of the following: a) better; b) legal; c) wouldn't have created a lousy precedent around freedom of expression; and d) wouldn't have alienated a significant portion of the players.

Some really smart - and vexing - questions. The answers aren't really clear, but I do feel we've reached a precipice when it comes to issues of free speech and sports. I think that, ultimately, the Irving debacle will be the incident that precipitated a new set of guidelines for negotiating that space.

A few decades ago, Irving, with his "flat earth free-thinker" mentality might've been considered "zany." But this was before the advent of social media. The closest parallel I can think of is Steve Carlton. The HOF lefty was considered nutty and eccentric for many years. But he had a self-imposed "wall of silence" for many years and refused interviews. Which turned out to be a godsend for his various employers. Because when he did finally speak to the media....whoa. What a ****storm.

Treasonous presidents with illegitimate children. Gamma rays. AIDS conspiracies. Elders of Zion. Two plus two doesn't necessarily equal four. It was the "kitchen sink" ... and then some.

https://deadspin.com/thin-air-in-the...d-co-478492324

Imagine if he had access to social media. It boggles the mind. The NBA, which has positioned itself as a progressive institution (a stance that has a certain amount of credence when compared to the often regressive sensibilities of the NFL) now finds itself butting up against the limits of that progressivism, and exposing itself to charges of hypocrisy.

What if players or executives wanted to voice solidarity with Hong Kong or China's Uyghur population? Well, witness the blowback to former Rockets exec Darryl Morey when he tweeted his solidarity with Hong Kong, or the banishment from the league of outspoken center Enes Freedom (nee Kantner) who took the league and LeBron James to task for implicitly condoning violence against China'a Muslim population.

So, social justice and free speech for whom? Supposing a NBA player wanted to wear a "Free Palestine" tee-shirt. That should be their prerogative. But would there be repercussions? If so, why?

Besides skirting the basic issue of what the limits of expression are, and which groups are more (or less) deserving of protection, the league, for all of its social justice pivoting, is still a business. Most of their decisions are commensurate with that fact. Some are just handled a lot more smoothy than others.

Take, for example, the Warriors decision to fire Mark Jackson in 2014. Ostensibly an odd decision, since he had just led the Dubs to the doorstep of the Western Conference Finals and to one of their winningest record in years.

But, the (self) avowedly religious coach had also seen fit to "pray for Jason Collin's soul" after the player came out as Gay. (This was coupled with Jackson's being extorted by a professional stripper) With an openly gay exec (Rick Welts) and being the spiritual epicenter of the LGBQT community, the Dubs probably decided it was time for Jackson to move on, even though he was quite close to Steph Curry. It (obviously) proved to be the right call.

Other examples:

Donald Sterling, whose noxious history of racism was tolerated until it spilled out into the open with his comments involving Magic Johnson and other players. Gone.

Meyers Leonard, a serviceable big man made an anti-Semitic slur while playing a video game. Gone.

Robert Sarver, the (almost) former owner of the Phoenix Suns, who had used racist and misogynistic language for year as well as fostering a workplace rife with sexual harassment. Fined $10M and suspended for a year. Until the players stepped up and cried "bull****." Sarver is now in the process of selling the team.

Which brings us to "L'Affaire Irving."

So many players involved in this dumpster fire:

1) Irving. Not much to say here, except the old adage "when someone shows you who they are....believe them." Grudging kudos for sticking to his ill-informed positions even under duress. (He seems to have recently found his way to contrition)

2) Adam Silver. Wanted an in-person meeting with Irving. Why? A "knishes and kumbayah" conference? As I said earlier, Meyers Leanord (who is not one of the top scorers in history is still waiting for his chat with the commissioner for an arguably less egregious offense.

3) The ADL. Jonathan Greenblatt said that the "the answer to the question of whether you're an anti-Semite is always no." Well, no it's not, actually. Irving probably meets the definition. But you can't punish people for thinking certain things, only publishing them. Or acting on them.

4) The Nets. What a joke. Owner Joe Tsai evidently tried texting Irving for a week without response. It's almost an "SNL" skit.

"Hi Kyrie, it's Monday. It's Joe. Can we talk?"

"Hi Kyrie...Joe again. Tuesday afternoon. I think we have a real problem brewing. Give me a shout at your convenience."

"Hey Kyrie...it's Joe. Joe Tsai. You know, the owner of the Nets. It's now Friday, and I'm beginning to think you're ignoring me on purpose."

Now, the Nets have given Irving "six steps" for rehabilitation.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/n...on-per-report/

This is far too late. It's also patronizing. I don't see how Irving would accept that, but perhaps that's the point. Furthermore, in a league that's often been viewed through the prism of "white owners/black players" with skepticism by many players, this surely is a misstep.

The media. Who can really blame the scrum for pouncing on such a juicy story. But, predictably what ensued was lazy journalism. Instead of thoughtful commentaries on the limits of free speech, we got a lot of "gotcha" pieces on fellow NBA players (mostly Black) who had refused to take Irving to task. Well, given that Irving has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with them on issues facing the Black community, this perspective isn't that surprising. Nor should it be.

My best guess is that this whole sordid affair ends up with Irving being the first superstar athlete in his prime whose social media comments torpedoed his career.

But he likely won't be the last.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by Jaybee

Assuming everyone stays healthy, which is a terrible assumption, it's not hard at all for me to imagine Phoenix, Memphis, Dallas, GS or Denver in the Finals. And I don't have a great feeling about the Clips and whether Kawhi will play meaningful basketball again, but if they can put their whole team together for a month or two before the real games start, they should be worrisome too. The Pels are really good, but have some learning to do. Next year is their year.

If I had to pick one of those right now... Dallas, with Memphis a close second.

I'm not generally a fan of "Hero/Savior" teams. Sometimes it works out (Giannis) but most of the times it doesn't. Doncic is a total stud. And much more athletic than given credit for. But he's a guard that leads his team in rebounding (yeah, I know, "Wes" but how many rings does he have?) and has twice as many assists as the next player. I don't think that bodes well for them.

As for the Pelicans, I'm still not convinced (even with the weight loss) that Zion can stay healthy for an entire season.

[Rocket]

This season has not gone the way I expected it would AT ALL. Granted, we are only ~10 games into the season and so much can change in the next 72 games. I watched my Warriors inexplicably go 0-5 against the Hornets, Heat, Magic, Pistons, and Pelicans. Meanwhile the Jazz have blown me away and while I expected the Cavs to be decent, I certainly didn't expect them to be second in the east. I'm loving the drama and poor quality of play from the Lakers and Nets.

[username]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

...my best guess is that this whole sordid affair ends up with Irving being the first superstar athlete in his prime whose social media comments torpedoed his career...

For what it's worth, I agree with nearly everything you said in that book you wrote up there, especially the part about me being smart and devastatingly handsome. I just don't know what Silver or the league is supposed to do about any of this. They're bound by the law and their collective bargaining agreement with the players. And Kyrie is one of the leaders of the union! As you say, what a ridiculous mess made much messier by the existence of social media.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by username

For what it's worth, I agree with nearly everything you said in that book you wrote up there, especially the part about me being smart and devastatingly handsome. I just don't know what Silver or the league is supposed to do about any of this. They're bound by the law and their collective bargaining agreement with the players. And Kyrie is one of the leaders of the union! As you say, what a ridiculous mess made much messier by the existence of social media.

Add to the list very keen vision and really cultured. The stuff you mentioned was written in very small print in the footnotes. In Gaelic.

[username]

Mom said I should study Gaelic. But I wanted to study Sumerian. I should have listened to mom.

[Louis]

Well, sometimes you're just too big to fail.

I wonder if Kyrie said "Adam, believe me, some of my best friends are Jewish..."

WASHINGTON — N.B.A. Commissioner Adam Silver said Thursday that he didn’t believe Nets guard Kyrie Irving was antisemitic after meeting with him in person this week at the league’s headquarters in Manhattan. Irving has been facing backlash for promoting an antisemitic film on Twitter last month.

“We had a direct and candid conversation,” Silver, who is Jewish, said in an interview with The New York Times, adding, “He’s someone I’ve known for a decade, and I’ve never heard an antisemitic word from him or, frankly, hate directed at any group.”

[MikeRodg]

Wonder why kyrie is still playing

[XXtwindad]

The Kings just dropped 153. Granted, it was the Nets, but still. I’ll always have a fond spot for my hometown team. I remember when the days of Reggie Theus and Dwayne (the “Mullet”) Schintzius. And the glory days of the groundbreaking early Aughts Kings.

Fun to see them finally get some mojo back.

[XXtwindad]

With apologies to Tom Chambers and pre flat-top Chris Mullin.