To match Interview NBA/STERN

David Stern goes on the offensive during media tour

1 Comment

David Stern is winning the war of public perception.

Regular readers here know how I assign blame for the lockout and missed games, but make no mistake that in the court of public opinion the players are going to be the big losers. We know the players, while the owners are faceless (save Mark Cuban). We know exactly what the players make, and we know we would play basketball for a living for a fraction of that. The “let us play” PR disaster didn’t help matters, but the fact is the players were going to lose the perception battle.

In the last 24 hours David Stern has been on a media tour and gone on the offensive, painting the owners as a completely fair minded group who are stunned that the players don’t want to agree to their terms.

It’s all spin — just as union chief Billy Hunter’s media blitz was — but Stern is better at it. He cherry picks facts, but can do it in a way that he sounds more reasonable than the owners actually have been. Like what he said on the Dan Patrick Show (as transcribed at CSNChicago.com).

I would say that given the fact that the owners have made concessions to the players on no hard cap, on actually keeping all contracts in place that are in place — to pay them out in their entirety — that the players have asked for the continuation of guaranteed contracts and the owners have agreed to that, and that the owners have said, ‘If you don’t like the deal, you can opt out after seven years.’ I think the players — if the rank-and-file — truly understood the dynamics of the negotiations, they would have a completely different picture and they would say, ‘Let’s get back to work.’

“They don’t have anything that the owners want. The old deal expired. There’s no continuing deal. There was a 57-percent deal and if the owners wanted to continue that deal, they could have exercised their one-year option that they had to extend it. But given the fact that the owners believe that the league should be more competitive and that teams should have an opportunity to make a profit, and there should be ways to eliminate the loss that the league has suffered, in order to use those profits to have more revenue sharing, that we needed a new and different deal.”

This gets at the heart of the disagreement right now — the players started their position based on the old labor deal as a base; the owners did not consider that a starting point and made their own starting point with radical demands like rolling back existing contracts (good luck getting the courts to okay that after agents sued) and an NFL-style hard salary cap. That’s what makes Stern great, he sounds very reasonable talking about all the things the owners have given back in these talks. Even though the owners make up that starting point out of whole cloth and gave up things they never had in the first place.

The biggest story out of the media blitz was Stern saying that if there is not a deal by Tuesday he thinks Christmas Day games are in trouble. But here are a few other things he said in the last 24 hours.

From NBA TV: “When you spend the amounts of monies these franchises now cost and the losses pile up because player salaries have gone from the $1 billion we were arguing about in 1999 to $2 billion-plus, I’m not going to say, ‘Oh, we shouldn’t be make a profit.’”

That for the record is complete spin and, frankly, organic male cow produced fertilizer. The amount of salaries the players got doubled because revenue to the league doubled — player salaries were a set percent of league revenues (57 percent at the end) because the owners agreed to that deal. Go ahead and argue that 57 percent is too high, that’s a valid argument, but to say that players salaries doubling was the problem without noting the doubling of league revenues the players didn’t get is misleading. At best.

• In multiple interviews, Stern said that the it was the players legal council (Jeffrey Kessler) was the first to propose the idea of a 50/50 split of basketball related income.

Two quick thoughts. First, the split is only half the question, the other half is how you define the revenue. If you take more expenses off the top (which the owners have proposed) then it is not a true 50/50 split. Secondly, who cares who proposed it if both sides are backing away from the idea anyway?

• Stern talked about teams being able to spread out the contract of a player they waive for non-performance to double its length. I, frankly, like this idea. For example, let’s use Gilbert Arenas and the three years, $63 million he has left on his deal. Under this proposal, if the Magic waived him they would have him on the books for six years at $10.5 million a year rather than three years at $21 million a year. For a lot of teams dealing with guys like Eddy Curry, this is a good way to get rid of him yet lessen the financial blow to the team.

• He also talked about allowing teams to offer one player under contract a special five-year deal that is substantially larger than what other teams can offer. The idea is to give teams a way to retain their stars — if you leave you are going to get considerably less money. It’s a virtual franchise tag.

NBA: Foul on Cavaliers that sparked Celtics’ comeback called in error

Cleveland Cavaliers' J.R. Smith makes a move on Boston Celtics' Evan Turner (11) during the third quarter of a NBA basketball game in Boston Tuesday, Dec. 15, 2015. (AP Photo/Winslow Townson)
3 Comments

The Cavaliers were in great shape against the Celtics on Friday, leading by four points with seven seconds left.

Then, it all went so wrong for Cleveland.

J.R. Smith was called for fouling Evan Turner on a made layup, cutting the margin to two points. Turner missed the free throw, but the ball went out of bounds off the Cavs. Then, Avery Bradley made a buzzer-beating 3-pointer to give Boston the win.

Rewind, though, and an incorrect call drove the sequence, according to the NBA.

Smith shouldn’t have been called for fouling Turner, per the Last Two Minute Report:

Smith (CLE) makes incidental contact with Turner’s (BOS) body as he attempts the layup.

If this were officiated correctly, the Cavs would’ve had the ball and a two-point lead with 5.9 seconds left. That’s not a lock to win – they’d still have to inbound the ball and make their free throws – but it’s close.

Cleveland is definitely entitled to feel the refs wronged them out of a victory.

Report: Kevin Durant has “done his due diligence on the Bay Area”

2 Comments

Kevin Durant has not made up his mind about what he will do as a free agent this summer. Until his playoff run ends, whenever that may be for the Thunder, his focus will be on bringing a title to Oklahoma City.

But even he admits he can’t help but think about free agency a little.

The buzz around the league is Golden State is at the front of the line if Durant decides to leave OKC, and he has done some research, reports Marc Spears of Yahoo Sports.

The Warriors play in front of an intimidating Oracle Arena crowd and are expected to debut a new San Francisco arena in 2019. Durant has quietly done his due diligence on the Bay Area, too, sources told Yahoo Sports.

His people — specifically agent Rich Kleiman and personal manager Charlie Bell — would be stupid not to have done some research on not only Golden State but on every other team he might consider: Houston, Miami, Washington, both teams in Los Angeles, the Knicks, and on down the line. Golden State, playing with Stephen Curry, certainly would have its attractions.

I’m still in the camp that Durant signs a 1+1 deal to stay in Oklahoma City (meaning he can opt out after one more season, in 2017), and it’s all about the cash. While he could get 30 percent of a $90 million cap this summer (about $27 million a season to start), with one more year of service in 2017 Durant could get 35 percent of $108 million ($37.8 million to start). That’s a lot of cash. Plus he gets one more chance at a ring with Russell Westbrook and Serge Ibaka, who both are 2017 free agents.

But you can be sure whatever Durant decides, it will be well researched and thought out. And he’s not going to announce it in a live special on ESPN.

Byron Scott expected to start D’Angelo Russell after All-Star break, but hasn’t talked to him about it

Byron Scott D'Angelo Russell
Getty Images
2 Comments

Communication.

When we talk about Lakers’ coach Byron Scott’s questioned player development skills with young players Julius Randle, Jordan Clarkson, and particularly D'Angelo Russell, it is his old-school lack of communication that comes into question. It’s what is different from what Gregg Popovich or Quin Snyder or other guys developing strong young players have done. From the outside (we’re not in practices/film sessions), we see Scott was not letting Russell play through mistakes — feeling that was rewarding bad behavior — but then not doing a good job communicating what the player is doing wrong.

This comment from Scott, via Mark Medina of the Los Angeles Daily News, sums it up perfectly.

Scott plans to start Russell after NBA All-Star weekend (Feb. 12-14). But Scott said the two have not talked about that issue.

“He’s not old enough for me to have a meeting and discuss, ‘What do you think?’” Scott said.

I would say you should have that meeting — it’s called a teachable moment. “What do you think? Well here is what I see that is different.”

Part of what is going on with Scott and Russell is the concern from some in the Lakers’ camp that Russell is a little too full of himself, that his ego is too big, and it could become a problem. So they are trying to take him down a peg. I would say that for a smart player — and Russell is that — the game is humbling and will take care of the ego issue. But you’ve got to give him run to develop him.

Play him, and then communicate with him. It’s a system that does worth with modern players.

Nikola Vucevic hits fade-away game winner for Magic against Hawks

1 Comment

The Hawks almost came back and won this — Atlanta went on an 8-0 run in the final minutes to tie the game at 94-94 with Orlando. The Magic had one last chance with 2.2 seconds left.

Nikola Vucevic nailed it.

Can’t blame Al Horford‘s defense on this one, he pushed Vucevic out and contested the shot. But in a make-or-miss league Vucevic nailed the game winner, Orlando wins 96-94.

If that looks familiar, Vucevic knocked down pretty much the same shot against the Lakers earlier this season.