Knicks Brawl Wrap-Up and AI to Denver

BRAWL ANGLES AND STORYLINES

Basically each columnist picks a person who they believe crossed the line. Here are some links to start you out. You will find more links later in the article as I discuss issues related to them.

Adrian Wojnarowski for Yahoo! Sports blames George Karl. He was the first one to make a move that could be considered wrong and "as a result" his team paid the highest price.

Dan Wetzel at Yahoo! Sports points the finger at Isiah. It seems pretty clear that Isiah gave the order to give hard fouls, and Wetzel claims that was where the line was crossed and it was his fault the fight broke out. Wetzel says, "If [Isiah] had an ounce of self-respect, he'd realize there is only one person to blame for this disaster and it isn't George Karl for his substitution pattern ... It's all gone in New York now – the pride, the respect, the dignity. This isn't just a bad team; this is a bad act. A once proud franchise and fan base brought to its knees as its pathetic coach makes excuses and whines for mercy."

Basketball, like any other sport, has an etiquette: rules that aren't in the rule book but are understood by every player and coach. The first bit of etiquette that was broken is written in certain terms, but is not in itself a mortal offense, and that was George Karl leaving his starters in with one minute left. I don't care if the Knicks had cut a 28 point lead to 10 in like 3 minutes. I don't care if there hadn't been a stoppage of play. Karl should have taken a foul or called a timeout and gotten his starters out at least a minute earlier. But as I said, this could be viewed as a poor and reckless decision by Karl, but it is not a mortal offense.

The mortal offense came when, up 19, JR Smith decided to try to dunk on a breakaway with like 22 seconds on the shot-clock, at a point in the game when the Nuggets could have just dribbled the ball until the shot clock expired on every possession and the Knicks would have had no chance. Now I don't think Smith made that decision out of malevolence. I think he just likes to showboat and is not a thoughtful player. But don't tell me that Karl couldn't have made it clear to his players when he took at time out exactly 45 seconds earlier, to kill the clock. Now you're probably thinking, well, he just said Smith is an idiot - even if Karl had told him to kill time he may have gone ahead and disobeyed him. Here's the problem with that argument: Smith isn't the one who stole the ball or started the breakaway. Andre Miller stole, recovered the ball, then made the outlet pass to Smith. You can't tell me that Andre Miller, a 7 year NBA veteran, also had a brainfart and forgot that they were blowing the Knicks out. Karl has been coaching for 20 years. Before that he played in the NBA and ABA for another 5. Basketball etiquette has been burned into his mind.

It may have seemed like a subtle thing, not worthy of Isiah Thomas's reaction, but imagine a similar breach of etiquette in the real world: You are at a bar, holding hands and having a soft and loving conversation with your girlfriend. Another man comes up and interrupts your conversation and, back to you, starts hitting on your girl. This guy hasn't broken any laws... now what are you going to do - sit there and wait for him to leave and take the offense, or stand up for yourself? George Karl's team was breaking a rule that, in the game of basketball, is equally serious. Hell, the Pistons brawl broke out for a similar reason - Artest gave a hard foul on Ben Wallace despite the fact that Indy was up 15 with 46 seconds left. Because the game was already decided, etiquette says that you lay back on defense and let the other team score. Artest broke the rules and Ben Wallace flipped out.

Let's get this straight right now, each player is responsible for his or her own actions. I am only arguing that, up until just after Mardy Collins gave a hard foul, the only person who had done wrong was George Karl. He is the one who put his players in a difficult situation, because once the Knicks gave that hard foul, Smith had every right to be angry. He was just following coach's orders. So although it was a poor choice to get up and get in Collins' face, I think at least 80% of the players in the league would have responded in the same way. The blatantly poor and inexcusable situations came later: the first one came from Nate Robinson, who I believe is incapable of being calm, when he shoved Smith away from Collins. The next one came from Smith when he tried to tackle Robinson, and the final and worst decision came from Anthony, who wasn't anywhere near the initial play, things were just calming down, when he came in and punched Collins in the face. I really don't blame Jeffries for his response. Carmelo was the second person to break rules of etiquette for a fight (yes they exist) - and that is you don't hit someone when they aren't expecting it. It was fortunate for Jeffries the rest of the players that he tripped and was then held back by Mark Aguirre, or this could have gotten a lot uglier.

Now in the aftermath of the suspensions (which I will get to later), a lot of people are yelling that Isiah Thomas should have gotten suspended (Marc Stein, Chris Sheridan (requires ESPN Insider)). This is ridiculous. Even if Isiah Thomas told his players to give a hard foul, there is no chance in hell he told them to go start a fight. So he warned Carmelo not to go in the paint. How does that change anything? If the entire thing had ended after the foul by Collins (the only thing that Isiah Thomas can in any way be implicated for) then no one would be talking about this. Collins maybe gets suspended for a game, but even that I find unlikely.

Kelly Dwyer for Sports Illustrated basically says that we are overreacting. He skirts around the question of why we overreact to fights in the NBA and not in other sports. He also refuses to get into any discussion about who is at fault. I wonder if he just likes fluff or if SI forces him to avoid all controversy.

THE BIG PICTURE

Okay we've analyzed how it all went down and discussed who is most responsible for the brawl, now let's talk about what the brawl really meant in the broader scheme of things. The first big picture item up: Why is this getting so much press?

Dwyer suggests that, "Together, cats and kittens, let's turn off the cable TV and move on." Well, what is it that is keeping us attached to the tube? Why is this getting mainstream media attention when fights in other sports are ignored? Obviously there's the fact that it is the first brawl in the NBA since the Pistons brawl and that one was a real homerun for the media. But why? Here's my take:

Americans, unless they are from an urban area, learn most of what they "know" about the young black male from the tv and movies. I don't have to tell you that, by and large, young black men are portrayed as violent, unpredictable, alienated from American institutions like school.

For a sport where you are constantly in physical contact, pushing for position, getting knocked to floor, there are remarkably few fights. But because people prefer to see their expectations fulfilled, every time there is a fight, it gets blown up and is all over TV and news, and NBA players are called thugs, etc etc. Why does this have appeal? Because it gives people an excuse to write off the young black male again, just as he is in his underfunded inner-city schools; to call him uncontrollable and disrespectful of what he has been given to him. People have an excuse not to feel bad about the immense racial divide that, if you look at recent history,continues to grow. It is outrageous.

Hockey players have nearly killed other hockey players in fights. There are big brawls in baseball all the time. But when there's one fight in basketball, no one gets hurt, emotions are running high, the players are labelled as overpaid whiners who don't appreciate what they have. "The NBA gets another black eye". Those looking to maintain their hate and ignorance about black men quickly translate the media's label of "whiners" into a words whose hate is even less thinly veiled - they call the players, as you can read in comments on discussion boards over and over, "thugs", "animals", "monkeys".

People who are crying about these players should look at other sports that have faced real scandals (how about steroids), or look at our politicians. Those people are the real betrayers. I'm a privileged, laid-back white boy and I know I've gotten into plenty of fights on the basketball court. You know why? Because I'm playing really hard and the game is intense. Your kids will see much worse fights in their high school sports and in their backyard basketball games. There were some poor decisions, but it was in the spirit of competition, nothing evil or corrupting.

STERN'S REACTION

Stern is trying to accomodate the money that funds the NBA. He is trying to broaden the NBA's appeal. As much as I'm irritated by Stern's authoritarian way of handling a lot of the NBA's issues, I can't really blame him for this one. It's not his fault that our society is the way it is. There were two things that he had to do after this fight broke out:

1) Look at the every day sports fans expectation of what the suspensions might be and then double that number. Why? Because Stern has to come off as if he is taking a hard line here. You see people's brains work in a funny way. A person's first reaction to evidence contrary to what they have so far decided is the truth is to try to prove it wrong. If they can't do that then they will try to avoid it. If they can't do that then they will distort that evidence, look for reasons to believe that it isn't what it seems. In the case of the NBA, people have to look at black kids who come from the ghetto. And what is being challenged here? Why it's perhaps the most complex case of denial: it's the notion that the world is fair and that people get what they deserve. In order to justify in their own minds that black people deserve to be poorer than whites and that they don't have any responsibility to have a hand in changing the world, they search for evidence that blacks will toss away any opportunity that is given to them. They can continue to focus their energy on the problems that they confront in their own lives. They are able to maintain faith that everyone lives in a world that is ruled by justice, accountability, a world where good people get what they deserve. So, when Stern hands out ridiculously long suspensions, it is just the hand of justice giving these "thugs" what they deserve. They can watch the NBA without their naive perception of the world being threatened.

2) And of course Stern has to view every replay and at least assign suspensions that, in relation to one another, are fair. Carmelo did commit the biggest wrong and did deserve the largest suspension. Isiah Thomas did order a hard foul, but he didn't start the brawl. Etc, etc, etc.

The Detroit brawl and the NBA's ridiculous rule changes that followed are another example of this. There is nothing wrong or ridiculous within the simple idea of instituting a dress code. It is the reason why the dress code was instituted that is offensive: Stern chose to institute rules that whitewashed over the hip-hop styles that many NBA players identify with. He portrayed that clothing as wrong. His actions said, you can come from the ghetto, but you better not wear any clothes that remind us of that fact. You can be black, but you better recognize that we don't want any reminders of who you are or where you came from.

I could go on an on about this, but I'll stop here.

AI TO DENVER

I guess this is all Philly could get. Two late draft picks, a flawed point guard with an okay contract and a $7 million expiring contract. This isn't going to do much for Philly other than allow them to continue to bomb this season and improve their own draft pick. I would have held out longer. They should have been able to at least pick up Foye or Gerald Green and a better pick in the draft. I guess it could have been worse too though. Next year's draft is supposed to be amazing so these late picks, if the Sixers find someone who knows how to evaluate talent, could net them some contributors.

As far as AI in Denver goes, I don't think that the there will be big issues as far as Iverson and Melo sharing. I'm sure George Karl will have his problems with AI, but I don't think that it will end up being too big of a deal. The thing that bothers me most about this trade for Denver is that Iverson and Carmelo are redundant. They both like to get in the paint and draw fouls. When Carmelo is doing his thing, AI is going to be a non-factor and vice-versa. Yes, AI does create for other players, but all you ahve to do is look at Marbury and Francis in New York to see that a player who is used to and good at creating for himself is not going to be effective when he is on the receiving end. Carmelo is not a catch and shoot player. AI is not a catch and shoot player. These guys are both scorers. That has been the story of both of their careers. I think all Denver needed was another guy who plays defense and can hit a jumpshot. Work through anthony, keep 3 or 4 guys who can defend on the floor. Even with JR smith, who plays no defense, as his second option the nuggets looked decent. Why? Because smith doesn't need to put the ball on the floor. All he wants to do is chuck up threes.

I'm not saying the nuggets won't be better as a result of this trade, or that they shouldn't have done the deal (they hardly gave up anything), but I don't see great chemistry or playoff success in their future.

More on Iverson

Paul Pierce quote on Boston getting AI: "I think it would work out with the two of us. I played with the biggest jacker in league history in Antoine Walker, didn't I? He was just jacking up shots. At least Iverson might go hit them at a higher clip and get to the free throw line."

Heat interested in AI

"A trade for Iverson, who will make about $18 million this season, would most likely have to include any two of either Antoine Walker, James Posey, Jason Williams or Udonis Haslem, and then probably include a young talent such as Dorell Wright, with a future first-round draft pick thrown in."

Riley has been quoted saying his interest in AI is similar to the interest he had in Shaq when LA made him available. He is "slobbering" at the prospect of acquiring Iverson.

Notes on yesterday's picks: Got the San Antonio blowout right. I forgot that Grant Hill always sits on the second game of back to backs. Reddick goes for 5 points on 2/6 shooting! Everyone, quick, run to your fantasy team and add him. Morrison also had a good game, actually making more than 1/2 his shots. I don't care enough to do the research, but that might be the second time this season he's done that. And Golden State came back from like 12 down to beat the Rockets. They didn't cover.

Yesterday: 1-2

Picks for tomorrow's games:

Miami +10.5 at Washington----- Okay no Wade in this game. He didn't even get on the airplane. Arenas has been lethal at home. 10.5 points is an awful lot for a team that is below .500. Maybe Antoine Walker hears Paul Pierce's chidings and actually focuses and looks for good shots. This is a tough one. Wiz don't play D, so I'm gonna go with Miami and their 10.5 points.

Knicks +6.5 at Indiana----- Knicks have been playing pretty well even though it hasn't quite equalled wins. Jared Jeffries' defense seemed to rub off on his teammates. Jermaine O'Neal has also not been so great since he got hurt last week, and I just can't see Jeff Foster doing much to stand in Eddy Curry's way. Knicks cover and probably win.

Nets at Raptors (no spread) ----- RJ is questionable. Toronto has been sucking a lot though (although they are coming off a victory against Orlando) and Kidd and Carter have been wicked in the Nets' current 2 game win streak. Remember, last year the nets started 9-12 then won 10 straight. I'm gonna say the nets' team defense does a decent job containing bosh and, they will also keep a hand in Bargnani's face if he decides to show up. I'll take the nets.

Denver -3 at Boston----- This is tough as well. Boston has played well since the AI rumor mill opened up. They have the athletes to run with Denver. I imagine Jefferson has a bad offensive game with Camby covering him and this will hurt his defensive intensity as well (he's been blocking shots like crazy). I'm gonna say JR Smith plays well after throwing up 2 in their last game and Denver wins and covers.

Seattle +7.5 at Cleveland----- Lebron has had two straight sub 40% shooting efforts. I'm not sure if he's just waiting for the old ball to come back, but he hasn't had 3 mediocre games in a row this season and I can't see Seattle's defense holding him back. Hughes is also back in the starting lineup and looks alright. Seattle has done a decent job of staying competitive without Ray Allen, so I think Lebron has a good game and Rashard Lewis does as well and the Cavs pull out the win but don't cover.

Atlanta at Memphis (no spread)----- Wow, two really bad teams, one definitely missing its best player (gasol) and the other probably missing theirs as well (joe johnson). Atlanta only has one guy who can shoot (Lue), but are the Grizzlies smart enough to just fall into a zone and watch the bricks rain down? Honestly thinking about this game bores me, but if you force me to pick a team I'll go with Memphis - they're home, they have some young guys who sometimes play well, and they probably have the best player in Mike Miller (so sad). Damon Stoudemire has also started to play okay and Chucky Atkins is alright too. Sorry for being so enthusiastic!

76ers +15!!!!! at Dallas----- Kevin Ollie led them last game with 14 points. Kevin Ollie led them last game with 14 points. Kevin Ollie led them last game with 14 points. Kevin Ollie led them last game with 14 points. Add to that the fact that tomorrow is December 15, the day when free agents signed last summer can be traded, making tomorrow the most likely day for the AI trade to go down since Monday. If that trade goes down it's likely that some other philly players are involved and will not be allowed to play. So Philly will be terrible. The only question left to ask is will Dallas come out to play? I've gotta figure that at home they will exert some kind of effort and will cover the 15!!!!! point spread.

Milwaukee +8.5 at Chicago----- Another big spread here. The nets were able to contain Redd and Chicago is an even better defensive team. They have also won 9 out of their last 10. Chicago looks really good but we have to remember here that the last 10 games Chicago has played have been against teams at or below .500. The last time they played the bucks, november 6, milwaukee was as healthy as they are now and the bulls won by 25. I gotta go with Chicago here.

Sacramento +7.5 at Utah----- Utah's playing well again after a little slip. Deron tied his career high in points last game. Boozer was also dominant. Bibby sucks on D and ain't gonna do much to stop Deron, but Kevin Martin had a good game against Golden State and if Matt Barnes hadn't gone nuts it would have been close. You also could see Artest on Deron. I'm gonna say K-Mart comes out with Derek Fisher on him and has another nice game and the Kings cover and lose... something similar to their 98-100 loss at San Antonio.

Golden State +10 at Phoenix----- This one is easy. Golden State has played tough against Phoenix dating back to last year. Barring losing players in an AI trade, they should cover the 10 points.

Clips at Portland (no line yet)----- Clippers are trying to make Livingston into a contributor now. Cassell's minutes are way down and now he's just plain out with plantar fasciatis. He's the leader of this team. It wasn't until he arrived that they became good. Portland will win this one - I'll take them even if they have up to a -3.5 spread.

Houston at Lakers (no line yet)----- Houston almost snuck by Golden State. Yao still gets tired, especially when T-Mac is out, and Houston has no other impact players unless Bonzi goes retro. I'll take the Lakers, even without Odom, by 4.5 points.

That's a lot of games!

Hello and AI, Young Talent

First of all I have to thank some people. All of the people over at ESPN are super nice. They understood my situation and saw my potential. They saw potential in me where others have been blind. As my blog title has informed you, I am now ESPN's top NBA columnist. Numero uno (spanish). This is something of an experiment for them - tossing me out on blogger.com to post my NBA insights. Marc Stein, ESPN's ex-top NBA columnist, said something like, "Max, you've heard of youtube and all the crazy promotional stuff going on over there. Well we would like to utilize your talents on a top secret (aside: I know it's not top secret anymore, but it was then. They said it was code Carlesimo, whatever that means. Now we continue Marc's quote:) project. What makes youtube and blogs and all that garbage so popular is that people see them as more authentic. Organic is another word you might use. You're gonna try to get that audience - the people who are on a an organic column diet." Then Marc opened his desk and took out two cigars. "It's Cuban, and I don't mean Mark," he said, offering me one. I turned down the cigar and Marc put his feet up on that same big oak desk and lit the cigar. "I, quite frankly, don't understand the appeal. We here at ESPN are normal people too." I nodded and smiled and said, "Marc, you are so right." I left ESPN and got into my '86 Plymouth Horizon with rust interior and puttered away.

My Plymouth Horizon stopped puttering at the ESPN security gate, so I ditched it. Like Eazy-E says in "Boyz-N-The Hood":

I looked at my car and I said, "Oh brother!"
I'll throw it in the gutter and go buy another

Neither he nor I threw our cars in the gutter, but you get the idea. Just like Eazy (RIP), I said something like, "Oh brother!" and decided I would have to go buy another.

I sat down outside ESPN HQ in Connecticut and wrote this column.

As Bill Simmons explained in his column yesterday, Allen Iverson is an amazing player. Bill was a little overdramatic (it's not the first time). Here are my thoughts on the situation:

Although young talent is important, you're betting on a somewhat vague future. Most NBA players have about seven years where they are at their best - something like 25-32. If you are holding on to your 20 year old hoping he'll one day be an all-star, carry your team to a championship, whatever, remember that unless this guy has proven to be a really really special talent, you are probably going to carry him on your roster for like 5 years before he's going to fulfill his potential. And that is if he can fulfill his potential at all. All that time you are holding a young player, your older players are losing value. That young player could net you a veteran star player from a team with fewer assets who really does need to blow things up and rebuild (see the 76ers. Also see Minnesota unless they are able to convince Billy King that Mark Blount and Marko Jaric are super good. I can imagine it. The guy is clueless. Then again, as Bill noted, so is McHale.).

Once your 20 year old grows up, he may or may not be the player you had dreamed he would be. Whether or not he lives up to your greatest expectations, the odds are pretty low that he will have much more trade value than he did at 20. Why? Even if he is fabulous, you will have signed him to a huge extension. You will be paying him what he's worth.

Other variables that could screw you besides the player not being what you dreamed: he gets hurt or has a psychological injury (Ron Artest), your team sustains other injuries or is unable to acquire solid talent to put around him, NBA changes rules (Ron Artest again).

Here's a list of players, 30 and under, who were heralded as great talents when they were young, now have new contracts and whose trade value is greater than it was when they were in their early 20s (I'll even include players from the 2003 draft who have signed extensions):

Elton Brand, Kobe Bryant, Jermaine O'Neal, Joe Johnson, Dwayne Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Lebron James, Chris Bosh, Yao Ming, Paul Pierce

And players who are now worth less:

Tracy McGrady (injuries), Eddy Curry (lazy, heart, stupid?), Tyson Chandler (offensively inept), Baron Davis (injury prone), Kenyon Martin (injuries, career may be over), Steve Francis (head problems), Stephon Marbury (head problems, lost a step?), Jonathan Bender (injuries force retirement), Stromile Swift (not very bright), Darius Miles (crazy, injuries), Kwame Brown (intimidated, not that good), Jay Williams (career ending injury), Dajuan Wagner (career ending injuries/illness), Mike Dunleavy (not very good)

Then you have absolute busts who are now out of the league in Marcus Fizer and Nikoloz Tskitishvili

A lot of the players who are big stars in there mid/late 20s today were not picked in the lottery - guys like Shawn Marion, Michael Redd (2nd round) and Carlos Boozer (2nd round). These guys didn't have any value when they were young so it wasn't costing their team anything to hold on to them.

So we have two lists, there are ten players on the first list and fourteen on the second. Right off the bat we see that the odds aren't very good that your "future star" is going to live up to the hype. Now look at that first list again - of those ten players, Joe Johnson and Jermaine O'Neal are the only ones who came into the league and were mostly non-contributors in their rookie years. We knew that if their bodies held out, they would be good. That leaves two players out of about 30 who, if they were 20 right now and were traded for AI, we could look back and say that their team should have held on to them (ironically those two players were traded when they were young, but for much less talented players than AI).

Are Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Devin Harris, Luol Deng, Shaun Livingston or Monta Ellis going to become the kind of player that Joe Johnson is? History tells us that it's possible but also unlikely. With the addition of Iverson, Golden State would probably be a title contender for a couple of years... once AI was done they would have a bunch of guys coming into their primes and would remain competitive. If Boston adds AI and picks up another solid veteran or two, they also become title competitors (they also must dump Doc Rivers). The Clippers and Bulls both have a buttload of talent and would be title competitors with AI - in fact the Bulls would probably become my favorite to win it all (sadly they aren't even trying to get him). In my opinion AI is worth more than just one of those players, but right now Billy King is desperate, so he could be had for any one of them. These teams need to stop hoping to steal AI for garbage because the future is full of surprises.

Other thought(s): Mike James' career will be the same as Erick Strickland's plus about 20%. They both didn't get into the league until they were like 26. They are both shoot first point guards known for defense. They both had one year where they were on a crap team and scored a lot more than you would expect. Mike James' 20% extra skills got him a long term contract, but he will never score more than like 14ppg again.

Picks for tomorrow's games:

Orlando -3 1/2 points at Charlotte------ Orlando, Dwight Howard gets up for any games against other big name big men. Today at Charlotte he will dominate Okafor and break out of the little funk he's been in.
San Antonio -7 points at Hornets------- San Antonio had a mental lapse in the first half against Minnesota. Popovich reminded them to play harder and they reacted big time. San Antonio in a blowout against an injury-riddled hornets team.
Houston +4 points at Golden State------ This one is a little tricky because you never know if that Baron Davis & Biedrins deal goes down before the game and those two don't play. I'll assume they play and the Rockets, who have been crappy whenever T-Mac is out, will continue their crappiness and will lose. It could be blowout, but Golden State has been pretty up and down so I won't predict that much.