Suspended Animation

Not that this wasn't unexpected, but I think David Stern's really gone overboard with the post-brawl suspensions. For one thing, from a basic PR standpoint I think overreacting to the fight in the post-Palace era actually does more to re-enforce the idea that the NBA has a discipline problem than it does to enhance the league's image. The qualitative difference between players scuffling with each other in response to a dirty on-court play and players going into the stands to mix it up with misbehaving fans strikes me as enormous and something that should have been kept front-and-center. You've got to penalize guys who were throwing punches, but there's no need for it to be this drastic.

What's more, this just seems fundamentally unfair to the Nuggets to me. On balance, this incident was the Knicks' fault. Collins' foul was over-the-line and came in a situation where there was no call for hard fouls of any sort. Then, as best I can tell, it was Nate Robinson who transformed a post-flagrant dispute into a fight. But the balance of punishment that's being doled out is overwhelmingly against the Nuggets. The suspensions to Robinson, Jeffries, and Collins won't hurt the team very much and New York had little to lose anyway. Ten games without JR Smith and fifteen without Carmelo Anthony will probably be the difference-maker in keeping Denver out of the playoffs. It doesn't sit right with me, though Wolves, Warriors, and Clippers fans will presumably hail Stern's brand of harsh justice.

On an unrelated note, I'd like to associate myself with Bethlehem Shoals' take on Allen Iverson.

Comments

I don't think it fair to blame this entirely on the Knicks. The game was a blowout with what, two or three minutes to go and Karl still had Camby and Anthony in the game. Basically, he was trying to embarass Isaiah and the Knicks because he's tight with Larry Brown. The NBA has a long history of hard fouls when a team is running up the score late in games like that, so Karl should have known something like that was coming.

I think the suspensions were pretty fair, although Robinson and Anthony could have been hit a little harder.

Posted by Ben | December 18, 2006 3:58 PM

"and came in a situation where there was no call for hard fouls of any sort."

I'd be disappointed in a team that wouldn't take a hard foul at that moment. That moment is why the baby jesus invented the hard foul.

Posted by Petey | December 18, 2006 3:59 PM

There is no universe in which Carmelo Anthony's actions in the brawl were more worthy of punishment than those of Nate Robinson, especially when the league claims that putting fans at risk is the worst offense. You are absolutely right that the Nuggets got screwed here, but at least we can expect a union grievance to reduce Anthony's outlandishly excessive penalty (the same that Jermaine O'Neal received for punching a fan !!!).

The only silver lining is that Isaiah Thomas' escape from punishment means the Knicks won't have an excuse to fire him, so he can keep running the team into the ground. I look forward to watching the Knicks wallow in failure for a few more years.

Posted by Colorado Luis | December 18, 2006 4:04 PM

Maybe it's getting lost in the shuffle somehow, but these suspension lengths really are qualitatively different from the Palace brawl. Artest was booted for the rest of the season, which ended up amounting to 86 games (including their 13 playoff games that year), and Stephen Jackson was suspended for 30, but those were the two guys who went into the stands to throw punches. Jermaine got the next harshest suspension, 25 games, but that was reduced on appeal to 15--which is line with the current situation, Carmelo getting 15 for the punch; Jermaine also threw some punches but didn't go into the stands.

Posted by Haggai | December 18, 2006 4:06 PM

"I look forward to watching the Knicks wallow in failure"

Dunno about the long term, but in the short term, this is almost definitely going to help the Knicks, not hurt them.

Posted by Petey | December 18, 2006 4:07 PM

I agree that Nate shouldn't be getting less than Melo got; that isn't fair. But Jermaine in the Palace brawl swung at a fan who came onto the court, not at some guy in the stands. That was really bad, but not very different from Melo's sucker punch, IMO.

Posted by Haggai | December 18, 2006 4:09 PM

I agree with every word... in the first two paragraphs. (Why you always hatin' on Iverson, Matt? Style is substance.)

The harsh suspensions make the fight seem worse than it actually was, and the penalities wind up hurting the Nuggets much more than the Knicks. In fact, I suspect that the light hand-slap the Knicks received may augur something even better for their future. I find it hard to believe that Stern didn't use this situation as an opportunity to remind James Dolan that 2006-07 is supposed to be Isiah's last season the NBA. If the comish has worked some backroom magic, I can't fault him for a thing.

Posted by Zak | December 18, 2006 4:09 PM

It's insane to think that Carmelo's punch was worth anything close to 15 games.

Posted by Steve | December 18, 2006 4:11 PM

ollins' foul was over-the-line and came in a situation where there was no call for hard fouls of any sort.

You're insane. Let's put it down to the flush left from Zero's sixty point night.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 4:11 PM

I finally watched this thing, and it didn't look at all like I had expected from all the chatter. The Collins foul was hard but not that terrible - Smith's response seemed a bit out of proportion to the offense. I agree Robinson should be penalized a little harder, but I definitely see why 'Melo got the big penalty. That sucker punch was terrible.

As for the PR thing: perhaps, and this is probably crazy-talk, but perhaps David Stern is more concerned with actually preventing fights than he is with mitigating the appearance of them.

Posted by brad lehman | December 18, 2006 4:13 PM

Luis, at least you out your bias right in your name:-)

I'd say the length of suspensions is out of line. But the ratios are right, Anthony deserves the longest because he threw a late sucker punch.

I'd have gone more like 3-5 games for the guys that got 10 and 7-9 for Anthony.

Posted by eric | December 18, 2006 4:30 PM

David "we have to lengthen the playoffs to make sure the Lakers play more games" Stern is all about PR. He's convinced sports writers that a sport that is suffering huge problems in attendance and TV ratings is doing great. Compare all the number of stories of how bad baseball is compared to basketball and you'd think baseball was the one whose championship games are getting like a 3 share.

Posted by Rob | December 18, 2006 4:32 PM

The Indiana Pacers know a bit more about conduct problems than just those that occured at the Palace. This fall several team members famously brawled in the parking lot of a strip club at 3AM. One (Stephen Jackson) was shooting off a pistol in various directions. Others later sat cuffed while officers quizzed them as to who owned dope found in a vehicle. This is during training camp, a practice session scheduled early the following day. Did the Pacers organization do anything about any of this? No, no suspensions, nothing the public or fans were informed of. Maybe their .500 record is partially due to who knows how much of such shenanigans, both during training camp and now during the regular season. I for one don't feel there is such a thing as too harsh a punishment for these idiots. I think if the truth could be gained a great many of them are garden variety thugs, dopers with guns, running with whores and other assorted criminals. Send them all home for the year, maybe a few of them go without their millions for an entire season and the message would get through.

Posted by steve duncan | December 18, 2006 4:35 PM

Eric, yep, I'm a Nuggets fan for life! But Matthew is proving that you don't have to be one to think Anthony is getting screwed here. Robinson is the guy who took the thing into the stands and supposedly that is the biggest transgression out there.

Posted by Colorado Luis | December 18, 2006 4:35 PM

Dude your bias is affecting your reading comprehension. Matt was talking about the Pacers fighting with fans in Detroit.

Robinson deserved a long suspension for escalting the fight with the Nuggets, he didn't get into it with the Fans.

I'd also say Matt was making the same point as me, all the suspensions were too long, but not saying that Anthony didn't deserve the longest. Sucker punching people after the fight is over is both dangerous and extremely bush league.

Posted by Eric | December 18, 2006 4:40 PM

I think the fines to each organization are the most interesting part of this. George Karl was jerk for leaving his starters in, but Thomas should have just ignored it and called him out after the game. The fines to the teams seem to be addressing what both coaches did and hopefully are a signal that coaches need to knock this stuff off.

Posted by map | December 18, 2006 4:45 PM

Hmmm. I'm reading this:

What's more, this just seems fundamentally unfair to the Nuggets to me. On balance, this incident was the Knicks' fault.

Matthew can speak for himself, but I read this as saying the Knicks should have gotten more suspensions than the Nuggets, and not a comment on the Pacers-Pistons fiasco.

Posted by Colorado Luis | December 18, 2006 4:48 PM

The foul wasn't that bad. He hammered Smith pretty hard, but held him up, didn't throw him down. Message fouls have long been part of the game. What's changed, it seems to me, is the way players react to any perceived afront. Not unlike pitching up under the chin in baseball.

Melo deserved every game of that penalty. Heck, he should've gotten another 5 for RUNNING AWAY after he threw the sucker punch.

Posted by Jon | December 18, 2006 4:51 PM

David "we have to lengthen the playoffs to make sure the Lakers play more games" Stern is all about PR.

I'm not saying he doesn't care about PR or about the NBA as a television product; he obviously does. But it doesn't follow that everything he does therefore has to be PR-driven. Sometimes, the simplest explanation (such as wanting to prevent future fights by maximizing punishment) is actually the right one.

Or, let me ask it another way: is there any reason to think that preventing fights isn't his motivation?

Posted by brad lehman | December 18, 2006 5:02 PM

But the league *does* have a discipline problem, and that is no secret to anyone who saw that fight. So the best strategy would seem to be to solve the discipline problem--return to the era where fights did not result in general chaos involving fans and all 24 players--rather than worry about how the suspensions look in the short term.

The Nuggets had scored, what 120 points up to that point? So there certainly weren't many hard fouls being thrown in that game, which makes you wonder why guys are so eager to jump into a dispute between J.R. Smith and some dwarf in the last 2 minutes of the game. My guess is that some of them think that the Stephen Jackson-type behavior in the Palace two years ago was pretty cool. That's what the league needs to get rid of completely, and that doesn't seem to be too much to ask.

Isiah should have been suspended, that's the only beef I have with the ruling.

If David Stern weren't so politic, he'd admit that of the 15 games of suspension for Melo, 5 are for throwing and landing a punch, 2 are for getting in a fight when you are one of the faces of the NBA, and 8 are for putting on the sissiest, most cowardly display in recent memory. At any rate, I think he deserves in the neighborhood of 15 but maybe I'm biased since the chances of my Jazz winning the division suddenly look at lot better than they already did.

Posted by Jeremiah J. | December 18, 2006 5:18 PM

Blaming Karl for "running up the score" is absurd. This is the NBA not highschool. These guys are all highly paid pros on teams who all have the same resource levels more or less.

Also agree that the Nuggets way over re-acted, did Collins foul him hard, sure, but as others have pointed out he also more or less just wrappend him up and made sure he didn't fall down. This isn't Bill Lambier clotheslining someone or Bruce Bown undercutting a guy who is in the air.

Posted by Eric | December 18, 2006 5:18 PM

awwww, the poor boys...

king kaufman says it pretty well:

"If ever there were a punk move in sports, it's got to be cheap-shotting an opponent, then blaming the opponent for running up the score. Once and for all, citizens of the world: If you don't like your opponent running up the score, play better. This is the big leagues. Your incompetence is not your opponent's problem."

Posted by supersaurus | December 18, 2006 5:21 PM

So the best strategy would seem to be to solve the discipline problem--return to the era where fights did not result in general chaos involving fans and all 24 players--rather than worry about how the suspensions look in the short term

Which was when? Fights were much more a part of the game in the distant past--IIRC, Feinstein's book says that they were commonplace. I don't recall the 80s being particularly fight free, or even the Knick-90s.

Isiah should have been suspended, that's the only beef I have with the ruling.

People who are arguing for this: are you saying no more hard message fouls?

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 5:24 PM

Why is that fights in NBA are considered more of problem than in Hockey? This supposedly "discipline" problems happen once or twice a season in the NBA while it's a nightly thing in Hockey.

Posted by Setton | December 18, 2006 5:35 PM

Why is that fights in NBA are considered more of problem than in Hockey?

Yeah, I wonder. (Is the NHL still around?)

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 5:37 PM

Setton,

Simple answers to simple questions: What color are Hockey players, what color are NBA players.

Any more questions?

Posted by Eric | December 18, 2006 5:38 PM

"'Isiah should have been suspended, that's the only beef I have with the ruling.'

People who are arguing for this: are you saying no more hard message fouls?"

I'm saying that based on my perception that it seems that Isiah seems to have encouraged not just hard fouling, but actual fighting. Comments about breaking Bruce Bowen's legs and similar things have been heard a few times. If all he did is call for a hard foul, then no I suppose he shouldn't be suspended. Still, don't players get fined for flagrant fouls? It seems kind of lame to have coaches able to say, "Go out there and take a $10,000 hit for the team".

Posted by Jeremiah J. | December 18, 2006 5:39 PM

Simple answers to simple questions: What color are Hockey players, what color are NBA players.

There is more than one meaning to the word simple.

Fighting in hockey is simply less dangerous:
a) the players and fans are separated from each other
b) the players are wearing a *ton* of padding and
c) playing on ice makes throwing a good punch difficult (ever notice how the refs jump in the instant the players are on the ice? it's because they can actually throw a hard punch at that point).

The fact is that with hockey, the sport is more dangerous than the fights. Players may get black eyes and bloody lips, but there are no Kermit Washington/Rudy T moments. (Those come from the game itself, where there can be some real scares).

Add in that hockey is a terrible television product with few identifiable stars and a small but loyal fan base. After the latest strike, they've all but abandoned a rapid national marketing strategy. So, if it brings excitement and puts butts in seats, hockey will look the other way. After all, who's image are they going to worry about tarnishing? How many hockey players can the average person even name?

Posted by brad lehman | December 18, 2006 5:54 PM

Disagree on the dangerousness of ice hockey fights. Start here and read down. Take note of

2004 - After repeated failed attempts at instigating a fight, Todd Bertuzzi of the Vancouver Canucks sucker-punched Steve Moore of the Colorado Avalanche from behind, knocking Moore unconscious. The pair then fell to the ice with Bertuzzi's weight crushing Moore face-first into ice. Moore sustained three fractured vertebrae, a grade three concussion, vertebral ligament damage, stretching of the brachial plexus nerves, and facial lacerations. Bertuzzi was charged by police, and given a conditional discharge after pleading guilty to assault causing bodily harm. His suspension resulted in a loss of $500,000 in pay and the Canucks were fined $250,000. Bertuzzi was re-instated in 2005, and Moore has made several (so far) unsuccessful attempts at civil litigation.

The Tomjanovich thing was a freak accident.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 6:03 PM

I should note that I don't think it's a straight race issue; that nobody cares about hockey is certainly a big part of it. In this case, a lot of it is because we have a "think of the children!" media at the moment. And everybody hates, hates, hates Isiah. Race, along with tattoos and all the rest, just makes all of the misguided narratives more credible to the readers.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 6:08 PM

I'm not too suprised with the suspensions, they're about what I expected. I don't think Anthony's was out of line because it looked like everything was almost under control again and his punch seemed almost unrelated to the actual incident.

As a Jazz fan, I won't be too sad if Denver struggles for a while.

Posted by Dave | December 18, 2006 6:17 PM

A point to ponder is that throwing a hard punch with unprotected hands can be more dangerous to the puncher than to the punch-ee. There's a reason, after all, why boxers and UFC fighters use hand wraps and gloves, and for the most part it's not protection of the opponents. Anthony's punch easily could have landed right on Collins' head, which would have left Collins with a minor headache, and Anthony with season-ending hand fractures.

Posted by Peter | December 18, 2006 6:37 PM

People who are arguing for this: are you saying no more hard message fouls?

I think a hard message foul is fine, but when you have a coach who seems to encourage hard message fouls whenever his team feels "embarrassed", then the hard message foul is not being used very well.

Also, the Knicks were getting throttled. The time to show that you have pride and to deliver a message to stay out of the paint is when you have narrowed the Nuggets lead to 10, not when the game's already out of reach. Do you really think that Zeke would have been cool if the Nuggets had just jacked up 3 pointers for the last part of the game?

Also:

between J.R. Smith and some dwarf

That's some great work right there.

Posted by MM | December 18, 2006 6:38 PM

It's accepted in hockey because it always has been. It's not accepted in hoops because it always has not been (even when the players were mostly white). Pretty simple, I think.

(BTW - huh, we have a Jazz fan and a Nuggets fan here. What, does that make at least one fan of every NBA team commenting on MY's hoops posts?)

Posted by Al | December 18, 2006 6:40 PM

It's not accepted in hoops because it always has not been (even when the players were mostly white).

If I'm recalling what Feinstein wrote in "The Punch," (and if Feinstein's not lying), that's just not true. There used to be fights all of the time in ye olden days.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 6:44 PM

I don't think it fair to blame this entirely on the Knicks. The game was a blowout with what, two or three minutes to go and Karl still had Camby and Anthony in the game. Basically, he was trying to embarass Isaiah and the Knicks because he's tight with Larry Brown.

I keep reading stuff about running up the score. Didn't see the game myself, so, I'd like to know exactly how much Denver was up by, and how much time was left. My own take on this is that, if a coach wants to risk injuries to key players by having them on the floor in non-essential situations, that should be his right and nobody should frown on it. Baketball is a game of runs, after all, and, as a long-time suffering Boston fan, it is my heartfelt belief that there is no such thing as a safe lead.

Posted by Jasper | December 18, 2006 6:45 PM

What, does that make at least one fan of every NBA team commenting on MY's hoops posts?

If we have a Grizzlies fan here, I would be truly amazed.

Posted by a | December 18, 2006 6:55 PM

"Message fouls have long been part of the game."

That type of cheap 'message' (and, for that matter, Isiah's entire understanding of the game) melted away when the Bulls figured them out 20 years ago. Too bad for the Knicks (and good for the Pistons) that Dumars figured it out but Isiah didn't.

"Isiah should have been suspended, that's the only beef I have with the ruling."

But that's gotta be a pretty big beef.

"People who are arguing for this: are you saying no more hard message fouls?"

At least, no more cheap, save the baby coaches ego 'hard message fouls'; save them for real slights, and react more harshly when the encouraging party at least has some chance of getting his jaw whacked, as opposed to hiding out on the bench behind a suit and a lame excuse.

"The only silver lining is that Isaiah Thomas' escape from punishment means the Knicks won't have an excuse to fire him, so he can keep running the team into the ground. I look forward to watching the Knicks wallow in failure for a few more years."

The league would be better off without him, but the fact that he's taking the Knicks down with him is worth something.

Posted by drinkof | December 18, 2006 7:50 PM

A point to ponder is that throwing a hard punch with unprotected hands can be more dangerous to the puncher than to the punch-ee. There's a reason, after all, why boxers and UFC fighters use hand wraps and gloves, and for the most part it's not protection of the opponents. Anthony's punch easily could have landed right on Collins' head, which would have left Collins with a minor headache, and Anthony with season-ending hand fractures.

Peter,

This would all be interesting and applicable if 'Melo had actually thrown a punch. Instead, he went with the 'bitch slap and run" and escaped not only Jared Jeffries (the hero of this fracas), but also any street cred he may have had.

Posted by keatssycamore | December 18, 2006 8:16 PM

SCMT, re: hockey you are conflating issues of "violence" and "fighting". Bertuzzi's goonishness didn't happen in a 'fight'. Some have said (somewhat convincingly, I might add), that the Bertuzzi and McSorley incidents wouldn't have happened had there just been a fight. That's not to excuse in any way the actions, but there seems to be some truth to the notion that the threat of an ass-whupping serves as a pretty good deterrent for all the little chippy stuff which can lead to a full scale donnybrook.

As a former hockey player, I can say that it's pretty hard to get injured in a hockey fight. Hurt, yes. As someone upthread alluded to, it's hard to throw a good punch on skates, while the sliding also makes taking a punch easier.

And Petey, 'message fouls' and 'cheap shots that set off brawls' are completely different beasts. First of all, what "message" are you sending by thugging a guy when you are down 20? "We suck?" Trust us, the rest of us heard that loud and clear. Second, a message foul is just different then following through on a threat. But you won't recognize any of this, as you are the high priest in the church of Zeke.

Posted by Pooh | December 18, 2006 8:21 PM

First of all, what "message" are you sending by thugging a guy when you are down 20? "We suck?" Trust us, the rest of us heard that loud and clear.

I disagree. NBA teams whose mottos are actually "We suck" pack it in by now. They are just happy to be collecting fat paychecks for doing something as emasculating as losing repeatedly. Those teams can't be bothered about message fouls. And since the Knicks have clearly been one of those teams for awhile now, I firmly believe the foul to have been ordered by Isiah as team building exercise. Because good teams will hurt you on nights when they are off and you try to show them up. Good teams have that kind of pride. They'll beat you the next time, but this time they're going to send you Petey's proverbial 'message'.

I think Zeke learned that from Bobby Knight or Chuck Daly. Or it may have been that time he was lighting up Stockton and the Jazz (again) for about 50 and Malone elbowed his face so hard that I seem to remember something about 20 stitches.

Posted by keatssycamore | December 18, 2006 8:44 PM

First of all, what "message" are you sending by thugging a guy when you are down 20? "We suck?"

Agree with keatssycamore that it wasn't that they were down 20, but that they were down 20 and Denver was showing them up - specifically keeping Melo and Camby in the game to do so. The message is not "don't beat us by 20" - rather it is "don't show us up when you are beating us by 20".

Posted by Al | December 18, 2006 8:57 PM

Re: Fights and Basketball vs. Hockey

Another worthy comparison is baseball. Batters charge the mound and it is a good ol' time with those goofy boys of summer. Nolan Ryan v Robin Ventura is still a laugh line but J.R. Smith is suspended for 12% of the season for just barely mixing it up when tackled by Zeke's Bad Boy and attacked by Senor Small Man Complex?

Posted by ben | December 18, 2006 9:00 PM

Senor Small Man Complex

I wanted to work this kind of joke in, but Nate-polean Robinson just wasn't going to cut it.

Now someone tell me how to pull off a Mardy Collins-Goon-Jon Chaney axis of evil joke and I'm out, baby!

Posted by keatssycamore | December 18, 2006 9:15 PM

Agree with keatssycamore that it wasn't that they were down 20, but that they were down 20 and Denver was showing them up - specifically keeping Melo and Camby in the game to do so. The message is not "don't beat us by 20" - rather it is "don't show us up when you are beating us by 20".

Uhm, as a conservative Al, it's out of character for you not to say "too fucking bad" to the Knicks here. You don't want to get shown up? Stop sucking. The reason you don't "show a team up" is so that they won't come out with their pants on fire and beat the crap out of you (scoreboard wise, I mean) next time you play. It's not fear of Tonya Harding's husband waiting for you as you leave the court. (How's that one, Keatssy?)

Posted by Pooh | December 18, 2006 9:49 PM

But Pooh, down by 20 and one team showing the other up is maybe the archetypal moment for a message foul. That, or when someone tries a trick dunk in the middle of the game. Do you think it would have been out of character for Jerry Sloan to order such a hit?

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 18, 2006 11:21 PM

Perhaps, SCMT, but Dee Brown wouldn't be jumping around acting the fool afterwords - even in this, Sloan's team would be professional about it.

Posted by Pooh | December 19, 2006 3:20 AM

With the exception of Pooh, none of you should ever discuss hockey again. You have embarrased yourselves with those comments.

I would have had some sympathy for Melo if you would have actually decked the guy. Can people over 6'4" not make a fist?
How many basketball fights end up being a lot of pushing and maybe a slap followed by the run away. Basketball fights are an embarassment much like the bench clearing in baseball that leads to zero punches thrown.

Posted by Hoops fans are sissies | December 19, 2006 5:06 AM

"But you won't recognize any of this, as you are the high priest in the church of Zeke."

It's weird. I'm not even that much of a Zeke booster.

While I think he's an above average coach, I think he's had significant hits and misses as the Knicks GM, adding up to only an average job.

But the CW on Zeke is so skewed to the downside that I come off like a fanboy by just not thinking he's Satan.

(And note how the brawl led to the Knicks knocking off one of the best teams in the association last night. The brawl may have been bad for the Nuggets, but I continue to think it was good for the Knicks.)

Posted by Petey | December 19, 2006 8:41 AM

Heee. Knicks over Jazz last night - and they only had two guards on the active roster! Meanwhile, Matthew's Wiz can't beat a Nuggets team that had in its starting lineup Linus Kleiza, Eduardo Najera, and Yakouba Diawara.

I agree, BTW, that on balance the fight will probably be good for the Knicks. For all the hype about how bad they are, they really haven't been playing too badly recently - I still see them as a playoff-bubble team.

Posted by Al | December 19, 2006 9:44 AM

And as to the question of Karl's intent:

Ric Bucher sez:

Karl, a source says, has been telling his players all season how he wanted to embarrass Thomas on his home floor for his treatment of Brown.

Posted by Petey | December 19, 2006 9:56 AM

Disagree on the dangerousness of ice hockey fights. [See Tood Bertuzzi]

Someone already said this, but that wasn't a fight, it was an attack; the league took it pretty seriously, ending his season. I think he should have been out longer (the next season was the work stoppage, which complicated matters), but it was a costly suspension. Hockey has also been pretty aggressive about egregious stick-related penalties.

I just think that the NBA and NHL are an apples-to-oranges comparison, which makes drawing conclusions about race sketchy.

Posted by brad lehman | December 19, 2006 9:58 AM

Everyone knows that hockey players carry a potentially lethal weapon at every point in the game except during a fight, right? And that they move at great speed except during a fight right?

A fight in basketball is an escalation in violence (unless, as in this case, some of the players fight like little girls). In hockey, it's a significant decrease in the level of violence.

Posted by Marcel | December 19, 2006 10:04 AM

With the exception of Pooh, none of you should ever discuss hockey again.

I don't think this is an instruction that most of us will have much problem following. That, I gather, is of symptomatic a real problem for the NHL: nobody cares.

I don't follow hockey at all, and know nothing about the sport. So I'm happy to acknowledge the fight/violence(or attack) distinction without understanding its importance. From my perspective, the important thing to note is that the Tomjanovich injury was a massive aberration. Who was the last NBA player to be significantly injured (missed a game due to said injury) in a fight? I can't recall, and I don't think it's because the name gets lost in amongst the thicket of other such names.

As for race: As I said above, I don't think people jump on fighting NBA players because they're black; I think it's easier for people to believe certain kinds of narratives about NBA players because they're black.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 19, 2006 10:43 AM

So I'm happy to acknowledge the fight/violence(or attack) distinction without understanding its importance.

Imagine, say, Charles Oakley walking up behind a player that wasn't paying any attention to him, and punching him in the back of the head so hard that it broke his neck. It's a different animal entirely than a normal fight, hockey or basketball.

As for race: As I said above, I don't think people jump on fighting NBA players because they're black; I think it's easier for people to believe certain kinds of narratives about NBA players because they're black.

I'll certainly buy that, as long as by people you mean consumers (not producers) of media. I still think that the narrative itself (and those who promote it) is dumb and antagonistic.

Posted by brad lehman | December 19, 2006 11:58 AM

"That, I gather, is of symptomatic a real problem for the NHL: nobody cares."

I don't care if nobody cares. The NHL has been hurt by expanding to places to try to make everybody care and by chasing national TV money. The game will get better the less you, the casual at best hockey fan, cares.

They'll always be teams in Detroit, Boston, Chicago and various places in Canada. That's all we need.

Posted by witless chum | December 19, 2006 1:27 PM

Iverson to Denver for crap. I can't believe the 76ers couldn't get a better deal than that. Billy King is determined to save Isiah's reputation, apparently.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 19, 2006 3:43 PM

Nene better get into shape. Game on!

Posted by Petey | December 19, 2006 3:54 PM

Woo hoo! But will there be enough basketballs to go around once Carmelo comes back?

Posted by Colorado Luis | December 19, 2006 3:58 PM

"But will there be enough basketballs to go around once Carmelo comes back?"

David Stern is giving them an exemption. They get two basketballs after January 20th.

Posted by Petey | December 19, 2006 4:03 PM

Oh, man can you imagine the number of powder blue Iverson jerseys that are going to sell in the next month or so?

Posted by Pooh | December 19, 2006 4:06 PM

And thank you, Mardy Collins. I was worried Iverson was going to spend another month in NBA prison.

Will Iverson average 40ppg for the next month so he can be more of a distributor once Melo gets back and still win the scoring title?

Posted by Petey | December 19, 2006 4:10 PM

There must be some Sternwerk at work here. How can you give up Iverson for basically Miller? How is that legal? Philly, Minny, and the Clips should all be ashamed of themselves. Everyone in Denver should have sex with each other, like some sort of modern VE-Day.

I have basically no interest in the 76ers, Philly, or Pennsylvania, and yet I feel slightly ashamed.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | December 19, 2006 4:11 PM

"I can't believe the 76ers couldn't get a better deal than that."

What's the problem?

The Sixers swapped one #1 pick (Iverson) for another #1 pick (Joe Smith).

Seems fair to me.

Posted by Petey | December 19, 2006 4:16 PM