Read my post above. Like I said, resting players have been done for a long time. And you mentioned the DNP-old. Teams rest their players prior to the playoffs. I'm not for that, but that's another point. But sending players home isn't. This is completely new territory. You and others may think it's a silly point to discuss, but I don't think Stern wants to have every team send their players home if the coaches deem their players need rest. All hell would break loose when teams can send their players home willy nilly.
So the complaint is that Pops sent the players home? You would be completely fine if Pops didn't play them at all?
For years now, Pop has been consciously trying to limit their minutes to extend their careers. So what exactly is your point? That younger players average more minutes? What a revelation. Btw, Lebron is one of the best athletes to ever play the game. If you have to use him to prove you point, then your point isn't worth making.
Wow, I actually laughed out loud when I read this. You really have no common sense, do you? Thanks for the laugh.
No it's not, this is what you said at the beginning. And even then, your complaint is r****ded. It has no bearing and no consequences whatsoever. It makes absolutely no difference.
Did you read the line after that, or the rest of the post? My main concern was him sending his players home. Makes no difference? Let's start having every team sending their players home if they won't be playing in the game then.
Obviously, with all those players heading home willy nilly, the skies would be full of planes. Inevitably, a few of those would crash into each other, and all the passengers would die a fiery death.
Sure. You have something confused. Nobody comes to games to watch Tim Duncan in a suit, they came to watch him play. Why the hell does it matter if he was at home or on the bench? He's not going to play either way. This has absolutely no consequences, and you are far exaggerating the issue.
Headline: "NBA stars earning their paychecks at home without even showing up for work." Rest of column: "Coaches find that the NBA schedule is too tiring for players, and the travel plans in first class airplanes can be arduous for players. Coaches find resting their players on the bench can still be tiresome b/c they still have to wake up, suit up, and drive their Porsches to the arenas and then do shoot-arounds. As a result, coaches believe sending their players home to rest in their beautiful mansions would be most suitable for the pursuit of an NBA championship. We need to be understanding of these millionaires that these traveling is extremely tiresome." Are you seriously asking what the public backlash would be if this was a league-wide activity?
There wouldn't be a public backlash, except perhaps from moron sports writers desperately trying to make a story out of something that is, in reality, inconsequential. And why do I say its inconsequential? I'll note that in all your posts you have yet to bring up any example of how sending the players home versus them sitting on the bench negatively impacts the game itself. Your whole beef is only a matter of flawed perception: If teams allow a player to go home in the middle of a road trip if that player isn't going to play in the upcoming game, that must speak to a lack of discipline or pampering. Two points: (1) There's no reason to think that just because this is how the Spurs do things, every team will follow suit. That's just your imagination running wild. Every team will have their own way of running their ship. (2) The fact that we're talking about the San Antonio Spurs makes this whole line of argument laughable. Since when has any journalist / fan considered the Spurs players to be undisciplined or excessively pampered by their coach?
Inconsequential? Laughable. It's about perception/image for the NBA, which is everything. Many in the general public already considers many of these NBA stars "divas," whether you agree with that perception or not. Even when players don't play, they at least show up for work (as their workplace is the NBA arena). They still do shoot-arounds, interviews... and all the other things that pertain to their job. Remember when McGrady didn't show up to some of the games when he was injured?? Many posters on this site bash him for that. He gets paid $20 mil and doesn't show up to cheer for his team (and he was injured). That's the perception. And to your 2 points: 1) There's no reason to NOT think that this won't be the trend if Stern let this slide. Teams rest their plays a lot down the stretch, who's most prevalent in doing that (the Spurs). It's a copy-cat league. What makes you think they won't just have them stay home rather than travel? That would be much easier no? Therefore, when you really have the popular stars (Lebron/Wade/Kobe/Rose) and guys like that stay home, the "diva" perception will just go through the roof. That will turn away more viewers. Stern is protecting the brand.These guys are already millionaires, and they're simply playing a sport. Do you really think having players stay home b/c it's too tiring to travel 4 days in 5 nights is a good thing to be played to the media? I mean, people can't get a job nowadays and the NBA finds it too tiring to simply travel? 2) Have you listened to ESPN 710? John Ireland, the Lakers play-by-play commentator blasted the Spurs and Pop yesterday on his radio show. Just b/c you don't hear it b/c more people hate Stern doesn't mean people do not disagree with what Pop did. The point of Stern doing this is to stop a potential problem before it becomes league-wide.
So.. why haven't they done anything about tanking? Why did they decide to block a trade for "basketball" reasons? Why did they reinstate Joey Crawford, an official who ejected a star player without solid reasons? The league has done far more damage to it's own image than any other NBA player or coach or organization. And you are absolutely insane if you think otherwise.
B/c the league is star-driven and you may agree/disagree. The NBA survives based on its stars period. Stern doesn't want the coaches to start sending their stars home to rest. Can you imagine the backlash if the real divas of the NBA starts staying home (Lebron/Wade/Melo...). The media will eat it up. It's only news to the general public, and I'm not just talking about hard-core sports fans, if the stars are involved. Nobody cares if the worst teams tank. Not a lot of people outside of real NBA fans care for Joey Crawford.
There you go. You admit it. This has nothing to do with "discipline" or the future ramifications for teams that want to follow suit. This is Stern penalizing a team for not making him money by bringing the "stars" on the court to play.
Doesn't matter. This is an issue with profit and ego, not an issue with "discipline" nor "competition" nor "integrity of the game" nor the "image of the league".
