They won't this year, either.  Grant Hill isn't the difference maker, okay?   They are a fun team to watch, but the bottom line is they don't have enough defense, and their bench is very thin.  Could they have traded Shawn Marion, the Hawks' pick next year, and a couple of their future #1's (which they love to trade anyway), for Garnett?  I don't know.  Marion does make a lot of money, making him perhaps not ideal for Minny, but his contract expires in two seasons (presuming he exercises his option, which he might not), so in terms of salary cap flexibility it's not so bad.  I guess what was missing was the young stud (like Al Jefferson), but maybe Phoenix could have throw in Barbosa and kept the #1 from Atlanta?  If so, then the 2 #1's they traded anyway (to get rid of Kurt Thomas) would have been equal to Boston's 2 #1's.  You can argue that it's too much to offer, but Nash-Bell-Amare-Diaw-Garnett, with Grant Hill and Kurt Thomas (still on the bench) is a bad ass team.  Lacking depth, yes.  But they now have defense - Nash still couldn't guard anyone, but Garnett and Amare would erase his mistakes.  And Bell is an ideal man to man defender.   

Too bad the Suns' owner is too cheap.

Now Chicago, for all it's talent, once again refused to bring in a bonafide star.  They need a low post presence.  They still don't have one.  I know there are a lot of "experts" who still think Chicago is the team to beat.  I ain't an expert, and I ain't one of them.  Until they have a legit low post presence, I'm not sold.  Could they have made an offer for Garnett?  Heck yeah. 

If they gave up Ben Gordon (most expendable player - there are tons of SGs in the league), Tyrus Thomas, PJ Brown's expiring contract, and the #9 pick in this year's draft, they blow the Celtic's offer out of the water.  Unfortunately, they didn't do it.  You think Hinrich-Duhon-Deng-KG-Ben Wallace isn't a bad ass team?  With Nocioni, Thabo and Sweetney still on the bench?  Yeah, they would be a little weak in the perimeter shooting, but SG ain't hard to find.  Maybe they can then sign a Kapano to a midlevel exemption.  Not only do they have the #1 team in the Eastern conference, they would have undermined the moves that the Celtics and Toronto made; those two teams are now arguably better than the Bulls (arguably, not definitely).

One of the comments over at TUP, by The Zoner, made my conspiracy thinking mind ponder... what if Kevin McHale steps down soon as GM of the Wolves?  If Danny Ainge's Boston Celtics win, doesn't he have room over at the Celtics' organization for McHale, a legend?  Is it possible that this trade actually guarantees McHale a second chance down the line to be in charge of a NBA team? 

Let's be honest, if life was fair, both McHale and Ainge would have been fired years ago.  Instead they pool together their resources, and Ainge gets to keep his job thanks to his buddy McHale, who'll probably get a second chance in three years when the Celtics are hitting rock bottom again (they will, and they know it).  No one finds that a bit alarming?  Didn't Bill Simmons write an article pretty much jokingly implying that McHale just hooked up his old team out of "loyalty"? 

Okay, let's get to how this effects the Knicks, and the rest of the Eastern Conference.  Before this trade, the Knicks were probably ahead of the Celtics; it's hard to say that now.  There is still too much that can happen - more moves, injuries, everything else - but here's how we break it down:

15. Indiana. Jermaine O'Neal needs to get traded to LA.  Instead he will probably end up in Golden State.  Regardless, this team is looking like crap.

14.  Milwaukee.  They haven't signed Yi yet.  Even if they do, he still has his spot reserved in the Asian Hall of Failures, next to Hideki Irabu and Michael Chang.

13.  Charlotte.  I like the Jason Richardson trade, and J-Rich plus Gerald Wallace, Okafor, and Felton is a great up and coming team.  But Felton is playing the point by himself this season (no Brevin Knight net), and it'll be a bit of a learning experience.  The team is still too young to make a huge leap.  Expect a good season, maybe just miss the playoffs, and a big leap next season.

12.  Atlanta.  Honestly, they should be 13, and Charlotte 12.  I like Acie Law IV, though.  He's not great, but he's tough, and he's willing to shoot the big shot.  He's got the potential to be the next Mike Bibby.  The problem is that Hawks aren't really a pick-n-roll team (where Law IV would really do well), so he'll be underutilized.  

11.  Philly.  I like this team.  They won't make the playoffs this season, though.  And that's okay.  They are rebuilding properly.  With patience.  I hated the Thaddeus Young pick (my least favorite player of the draft), but they made up for it big time with Jason Smith.  He'll be a very good player in the league.  AI2+Smith+Andre Miller = gold in two years.  All they need is to stay patience, let the kids play, and get into the lottery again next year.  Pick up another solid role player, and use their salary cap space (which will be free of Chris Webber's millions) to sign a top-flight SG... Gilbert Arenas anyone?  This team is finally on the right track.

10.  Washington.  Not heading in the right direction.  They had career-seasons from Caron Butler and Antawn Jamison last season.  But because of injuries, they ended 41-41.  Even when everyone was healthy, they seemed to have peaked early in the season.  Classic example of a team with no depth.  Antonio Daniels is nice, and hopefully he'll get more time this season.  But with Butler and Arenas coming off injuries, and Jamison and Arenas playing for new contracts, next season is going to be more about numbers than chemistry and winning.  And they still lack a serviceable big man.

9.  Orlando.  Yes, they add Rashard Lewis.  But they also lost Grant Hill's veteran presence, and Darko's defense in the middle.  This team has some good role players - Trevor Ariza, Redick, and Turkoglu - but they need a few more players to help out.  Lewis is defensively mediocre, and Dwight Howard doesn't have enough offensive moves yet.  Another trip to the lottery, and hopefully a decent signing next year of a point guard will turn this team into a real contender.    

8.  New Jersey.  Any of the four remaining teams in the Atlantic can win it.   All four should make the playoffs - that's what adding Ray Allen, Zach Randolph, Jason Capano, Carlos Delfino and Kevin Garnett does to your division.  Tough call on how to place them, but the Nets are definitely making the playoffs.  Jason Kidd is that good; VC and Jefferson have played together long enough now to know each other well; Krstic gives the Nets a much needed 4th option on offense, and Jamaal Magliore was a great pickup.  Boki is a monster off the bench.  Marcus Williams has to pick it up for an entire season.  Sean Williams could be the next Camby.  But right now the Nets lack a few things... mainly, the defense is very weak and can't guard anyone.   

7.  New York.  Wishful thinking perhaps.  The Randolph/Curry front court will make or break Isiah Thomas' career here.  If it works, the role players are outstanding - David Lee, Balkman, Crawford, Q-Rich and Marbury are perfect in their roles, if limited.  The key is getting the ball down low to the big guys, and hoping they can move it around.  This team could get it together and win lots of games, or struggle trying to figure it out.  It's too early to tell, but we'll bet that there will be plenty of both.

6.  Chicago.  Not that they dropped so much, but it's just that other teams have improved more.  The Bulls are still behind the Pistons (who, in case you forgot, demolished them in the playoffs - it was 3-0 before you could blink) and the Cavs.  Now, thanks to their offseason moves, the Raptors and Celtics have passed them, too.  Tough situation for the Bulls.  While they have patiencely waited for their "future", the window never opened.  This is why you have to roll the dice sometimes.  They should have made the push last year by trading for Pau Gasol.  I think it is conceivably that if they can't break out of the 6-seed by the trading deadline that the Bulls will finally go after a low post presence, maybe Jermaine O'Neal (for Ben Gordon plus).  But until then, they are just staring at the window, waiting for it to open even though it won't on it's own...

5.  Toronto.  Solid moves to add role players to a division-winning team.  They have their core in Chris Bosh, TJ Ford, and Bargnini.  Adding a shooter like Kapano to stretch the defense and a great bench player in Delfino will make the Raptors much deeper.

4.  Boston.  Three All-Stars.  Kevin Garnett has won 50+ games before with less talent.  They lack the role players and bench to go far, but with Eddie House signing yesterday, the possibility of more moves to solidify the team remains.  If they sign Brevin Knight I'll give them the conference.  More likely is a move for a PJ Brown type. 

3.  Miami.  By default.  Someone has to win the Southeast, which is now the weakest division in the NBA.  They could pile up wins by beating up on poor teams like the Hawks, Bobcats, Wizards, and Magic.  They managed to win the division last season even with Wade and Shaq missing lots of games.  Presuming a healthy Wade and a now-motivated Shaq, this team should manage to win the most unimpressive 50 wins you'll ever see.

2.  Cleveland.  Check that.  This team will manage the most unimpressive 50 wins ever.  I was very tempted to knock them down a notch or two - they just aren't that good - but I don't see who is going to beat them.  The Bulls?  Still lacking a low post presence.  The Raptors or Celtics?  Perhaps, but they have some chemistry issues that need to be worked out during the regular season.  In the meanwhile, the Cavs will chug along with little urgency, and somehow win game after game.   

1.  Detroit.  Motivated for the first time in years.  Still in their prime - Billups, Hamilton, Prince and Rasheed are all looking at hitting or starting their peak this season.  Hard to say any of them are declining, at least not this season.  Add in a deeper bench now that there is some experience among their youth - Jason Maxiell, Amir Johnson, plus a good mix of impressive rookies (Rodney Stuckey, Cheick Samb) and solid veterans (McDyess, Lindsay Hunter, Flip Murray, Nazr Mohammed).   Once again the team to beat in the East.  After cruising through the first two rounds, they wore out quickly against the Cavs (despite having a 2-0 lead in the series)... if they had a little more depth off the bench, they maybe they could have won one of those fourth quarters in games 3-6, and the series.  They really could have used a Grant Hill type of signing, but otherwise... they'll be the team to beat again this season.  But this may, in fact, be their last hooray.

Eddy Curry Gets Robbed:  The NY Post, of all places, has a nice angle on the attack.  Where one would expect that they would find some way to blame Isiah, Marc Berman actually sympathizes with Eddy Curry.  He makes a great point (first one of the year?), noting the similarity to Marcus Camby's situation in the 2000 playoffs (in which his sister was held hostage, and he had to help the negotiators in a harrowing ordeal).  This type of thing is rough, and especially for someone like Curry, who grew up in the tough streets of Chicago, but probably thought he was now removed from that life.  It can really f*ck with your mind.  Camby, as Berman pointed out, ended up with some post-traumatic stress to deal with... Curry may have some ill effects from this, too.  Physical injuries might be easier to diagnosis than mental or emotional ones, but when you are dealing with a young (25 year old) man, it may be just as damaging.  Here's hoping Curry sees the court as an escape....

Oh, and it's certainly telling that the Post took a much more intelligent approach to this topic than Deadspin, which asked the question "Does this (the Curry home invasion, on the heals of Antonio Walker's home invasion a month ago, also in Chicago) make it difficult for the Bulls to sign free agents?"

Um, I don't think so.  Were you aware that neither victims are Bulls players?!  Both are Chicago natives, which is why they live in the city, and were probably targeted by local people with familiarity with their homes; maybe if Ben Gordon or Luol Deng were getting robbed during the offseason I might worry about the effect on the Bull's free agency, but I doubt either lives in Chicago during the offseason, right?  Gordon is from Money-Earning, and Deng is foreign (don't know if he goes home to the UK, or stays somewhere in the Chicago area during the offseason).  Chances are they live in local apartments during the season.  Most Knicks, for example, live in apartments in downtown Westchester, near Suny-Purchase (where practice is held) during the season, then go home to wherever after the season is over (Chicago for Curry, for example).  So the answer to Deadspin's question is: No. 

True Hoops On What To Do About NBA Officiating:  Professor Henry Abbott (we like calling him Professor, since he has that Professor Charles Xavier thing going for him) has an article calling for more transparency in the NBA referee evaluation process.  What we really like is that he also included a link to, and a response, to a criticism of his post by another blogger.  That's the proper way to treat critics, in my opinion - if they have something legit to say, acknowledge that and then respond, as oppose to pretending that you are right all the time.  After all, if you are right all the time, then you can take their points and prove how you are right.

Our take: We agree the NBA needs more transparency with regards to their refs.  This is what they have to do to combat the perception (perpetrated most notably by Abbott's colleague Bill Simmons) that NBA officials are crooked.  But the blogger is correct - Abbott's suggestions aren't the answer.  

Abbott had suggested making referee "grades" available to the public; this seems like a bad suggestion, because it does open up a low-performing referee (who may in fact be very very good, but just because he's scored lower than his peers is being chosen) to public scrutiny.  We don't have that system of transparency in other sports leagues (I don't think there are MLB umpire reports out there for the public to see), and yet they are able to avoid the perception.  

What the NBA needs to do is a different kind of transparency, one similar to the NFL - address questionable calls as much as possible.  When a bad call costs a team the game, the NFL will review the tape and issue a statement within 48 hours.  The NFL statement is usually dead-on; either an acknowledgment that a mistake took place, or an explanation for why the call was made the way it was.  Or both.

Nobody from the NBA responds publicly when Mark Cuban complains about the refereeing.  Or Bill Simmons.  Or fans.

That's a starting point to getting the fan's trust back.  Also a good idea - allowing fans (maybe season ticket holders, or maybe grading should be available to all fans) to grade refs' performances.  You can put it on the NBA website - pick the game you attended, and grade the refs' overall performance (don't separate by individual referee, since most fans can't tell which ref made the call, as evidenced by the famous Donaghy Game 3 video).  Does this data matter?  Probably not... the NBA can ignore it if they want!  But just letting the fans feel like their voice counts might help sway The Perception.

Speaking of Simmons, KG To Boston: First off, calm down.  I still doubt this trade will take place.  KG is going to give up the comfortable kingdom he has in Minnesota (where he practically calls the shots!) to go to the most uncomfortable place in the States, Boston?  But since everyone is reporting it is a done deal, we'll take a look at it.

First off, Ainge has to make the move.  As long as Pierce is around, which is for the next four season since ain't no way he's trading a $21 million a year swingman to anyone, he has to make this move.  There is no waiting for the future in Boston; the Celtics are handicapped by Pierce more than anyone is willing to write about.  

The move for Ray Allen was a good one; we wrote as much.  We also wrote that it doesn't make them better than maybe an 8th seed.  Now, if they get Kevin Garnett (for Al Jefferson and a bunch of crap), we have several thoughts:

-Why is Minnesota trading him for that?  They can't get a better offer?  If the Knicks offered Curry (why not, they have Zach Randolph now, and he's almost as good as Jefferson, if a little more expensive - but he's signed for longer, too), David Lee (better than everything else in Boston's offer for KG), Dan Dickau and/or Fred Jones' expiring contract (makes up for Ratliff's expiring contract), and a #1, doesn't that top Boston's offer?  It also solves the Knick's roster size problem, too.

-While Ainge has to make this deal, and it is a good deal, I don't know if it makes the Celtics that good.  They have no depth.  In fact, their starting 8-man rotation looks like this: Rondo, Allen, Pierce, KG, and Crap.  Coming off the bench: Crap, Crap, and SG/SF Crap.  

Do they even have a backup point guard to Rondo?  Oh, and about that... Rondo may be potentially good (maybe Bill Simmons should do another 2000 word column on how awesome he is this year!), but until he shows and proves, it's a huge risk.  Point guard is still the most important position in the NBA; ask the Suns and Nets how important it is to have a good PG.  Better yet, ask the Lakers.  

So yeah, the Celtics might win 45-50 games next season.  Like we said after the Allen trade, the most important player is Rondo.  If he can make the leap to serviceable point guard, and keep defenses honest (big if: this is a guy who couldn't keep SEC defenses honest with his awful jumper).  And yeah, they might make some noise.  Or, if something goes wrong, like a serious injury to one of their big three (all are over 31 years old, I believe), that's it.

The Celtics have to make the move to open the window, something 90% of the teams in a league in any season never get to do.  But the window could close at anytime... it's a must make trade, even if the % it fails is greater than the % it works.

Um, in order words: Yeah, Simmons is pretty right on this.   

On the other hand, someone really has to prove to me that Kevin McHale is really going to go for this trade, unless Kevin Garnett is absolutely commanding him to do so.  This is really a historical ripoff.

My Favorite Anecdote of the Night:

Drinking with the softball team tonight. The Little Brother, who is as un-PC as they come, cracked me up with this dialogue:

Little Brother: I want to see that Chuck and Larry Get Married movie.
SML:Are you f*cking serious?  That movie looks stupid.  Plus all the reviews panned it.
Little Brother: Of course all the reviews panned it.  The movie critics were all probably like "Hey, this isn't funny. I am gay."

Finally, here's a YouTube, found via Gawker, of Tom Synder's best moments.  Tom Synder passed away on Sunday, so this is a good time to check out some great highlights of his interviews here in a 6 minute clip... guests highlighted include Elton John, John Lennon, Johnny Rotten, Charles Manson (not nearly half as intimidating as Johnny Rotten, who does the crazy white boy thing better than anyone ever, including Manson), Alfred Hitchcock, Cheech & Chong, and the two all sports fans should see, at the end of the clip:  Muhammed Ali and Howard Cosell.  

1)  Create a Blue Ribbon Panel.  For the purpose of "taking a long, hard look at the league's structure for hiring, retaining, grading and teaching its officials".  Well, JJ's comments were absolutely right - blue ribbon panels are usually a tremendous waste of time.  How's Senator Mitchell's "investigation" going for MLB? 

I would just add that I'm not sure there is a problem in the NBA with retaining referees, or teaching their officials... they seem to have a grasp of the rules pretty well; whether or not they are calling fouls constantly is something that can be worked on, but perhaps a better approach would be to make explanations for calls more public. The NFL's referees, particularly Ed Hochuli, explain calls (particularly difficulty ones) to the crowd via a mic.  Even when they get the call wrong, at least people understand what the thought process is, which makes them more understanding.  Obviously a NBA referee isn't going to explain every call to the crowd ("player #20 took five steps after picking up his dribble, which is one more than we allow in the NBA right now"), but on some of the trickier ones... maybe they can try?  Perhaps it might help the perception of the league if refs explained some of the more questionable calls not just to the coaches, but to the crowd, too.

2)  Rehire Joey Crawford:  Ah... this is the classic "writer passing off a personal agenda as an impartial take" on the league.  David Aldridge explained the reasoning in only one short line: "But after the Donaghy revelations, bringing back the game's best official is imperative."  Aside from the fact that I think Crawford is, in fact, on his way back according to most reports (making this a redundant point), I fail to agree that he's "the game's best official".  He has too many issues, and I've been meaning to address them.  Check my next post... seriously, it's coming. Anyway, yeah... my guess is Joey Crawford (from PA, long time Philly resident) has some connections or friends over at the Inquirer.

3)  Engage the Players:  Basically, "coaches and general managers are part of the rating system for referees; why aren't players?"  I agree with this one (as does JJ), in principle.  I don't know if it'll make a huge difference - do you think Rasheed Wallace crapping on 50 out of the 60 refs is going to help the NBA figure out what to do?  Okay, that's not true - Rasheed crapping won't make a difference, but let's say 80% of the players hate a ref; that makes him suspect.  Then what?  Does Stern or Stu Jackson or the head of the Ref's Union (Ronnie Nunn) put him on probation?  Demote him?  The issue isn't just getting back feedback - I image that the GM/coaches have given back decent feedback on the refs.  So the question then is "what does the NBA do with this info"?

And secondly, Tim Donaghy was well-liked by most players.  The coaches hated him (quick on the technicals, hot tempered), but the players seemed to like him.  So this isn't exactly going to solve that "rogue" problem, though again, if you are looking for little things you can do to improve the system, it's not a bad idea.

4) Be Bold.  Ah, the catch-all cliche.  Look, it encompasses any other suggestion you throw out there, except for "do nothing".  Anything new is by definition "bold"! 

That aside, he does suggest one great idea - farm out the refs entirely.  It is bold, but it is also riskier - we're used to home grown refs here in the US; MLB umpires, NFL officials and NBA refs are all controlled by their respective leagues.  So farming out seems a new, bold idea that hasn't been tried yet.  Problem is, well... I don't trust outside companies for really important sh*t at my business, do you?  Like I don't mind using an outside vendor for security or for lunch, for example.  But to have them in charge of my company's most important product?  Isn't that like IBM putting a consultant in charge of computers?  It seems somewhat risky, although it would make things like firing a bad official much easier. 

I do like the idea of using grades from the IAABO, an outside firm.  Again, getting lots of impartial feedback is a good start.  The critical step is the next one, though... what to do with that data?   Is Stern going to run off bad refs like he kinda started to do with Joey Crawford last season?  Is he even able to punish really bad refs with suspensions and demotions? 

If Stern is opportunistic, this would be his big chance to pull a power move and get some freedom from the ref's union to do some unilateral decision making on referee evaluations.  This is Stern's 9/11 (horrible analogy, I apologize in advance).  He can take some power if he is so inclined, and start cutting off so-called "suspicious" or "possibly rogue" refs at his discretion.  Would that make the league better?  Perhaps yes, perhaps no... depends on who he cuts and why.  But fear is the enemy of complaisancy.  And the refs in the NBA have definitely gotten a little too comfortable.  Now that's bold. 

Also, a while back I wrote a piece over at TSF about the future of officiating in general.  It dealt with all three major sports, and how automated they could become if they wanted.  The NBA could cut out half the ref's calls by using such things as sensors on the ball and out lines (to determine possession) - not having to concentrate too much on this would make it easier for ref's to focus on the calls that humans have to make. 

In the end, though, here's the deal:  The NBA's problem isn't the possibility of point shaving referees or players.  That will always be a risk, to a certain degree.  The real problem is the perception fans (or critics) have of the referees in the NBA, versus other leagues.  The best way to deal with that is to address the complaints in a more serious manner; instead of fining Mark Cuban ever week, answer his complaints publicly.  Answer the feedback, and address the concerns raised.  Tackle the perception problem.

The NY Daily News has taken a big interest in the Tim Donaghy story, placing the story on its front page for the third time in a week.  Today's development is an "exclusive" look at the Tim Donaghy's high school friend James Battista, who is alleged to be one of the two bookies that Donaghy placed bets with.  The article had some interesting points:

"There is no evidence he fixed games for his gambling associates, but sources said he funneled confidential information about which referees would work upcoming games.

The bookies allegedly threatened to expose Donaghy's gambling and claimed to have contacts in the Mafia, but law enforcement officials believe their ties to the mob were just hot air."

The first point is "there is no evidence he fixed games".  If this is true, and all we are talking about here is a referee "funneling confidential info" to "gambling associates", this story will barely be a blip by the time the season gets rolling.  For all the hyperbole being tossed around, from bloggers and newspapers picking games that "seemed suspicious" to reports about how this could take down the NBA, it may in fact turn out to be insignificant.   We'll see how it plays out, but it is becoming more and more likely....

Also, secondly: the Mafia contacts "were just hot air".  For one, this makes those Post stories about how Donaghy's "family were threatened" seem fictionous.  Secondly, this also makes me wonder how the Feds really found out about this situation.  If it was from monitoring the Gambino family, then the Mafia connections were real.  But it might be possible that is just a cover story, and that the Feds actually found this out because they were tipped off by someone else... perhaps another referee, or perhaps Vegas got suspicious?

Commenter JJ made a good point in the last posting:

"Donaghy hired a top flight whistle blowing attorney who was a former fed prosecutor. He must have something he can sing about to save his skin. And as the Feds first found out about him through their mob wiretaps, I think they're looking for those in the basketball world, not in the mob."

Is there something for Donaghy to sing about that can save his skin?  If so, then this story might have some legs after....

Let's use the Tim Donaghy example.  A referee like him gets paid, according to David Stern at yesterday's press conference, $260,000 a year.  Not to mention benefits, other income opportunities (i.e. conferences, freebies, etc.), and the potential to keep moving up in salary to, say, $300,000/yr or more.  So it's a well-paying job.  Again, it's comparable to a decent lawyer or doctor, and the lifestyle is perhaps even more prestigious (witness one newspaper account of Donaghy's run-in with a mailman, in which he supposedly screamed "Do you know who I am?  I'm an NBA referee!"). 

Now, how much would a mafia crew have to pay a referee to make it worth to endanger his job security, and possibly jail time?   Even if you presume you wouldn't get any jail time if you get caught, there goes your name, your reputation, your ability to earn a living.  I would guess you would need to pay me at least more than I make now to make it worth my time.  For a referee with Tim Donaghy's experience, that equals at least about $300,000 a year for me to endanger my career and life to fix games for you.  Minimum $300,000 to buy a formerly clean ref.  

How many Mafia outfits can afford to buy a referee?  According to the America Mafia website, there are only about 26 cities with mafia families in the US.  Tim Donaghy is being investigated in connection with the Gambino family of NYC, one of the 5 families that are alleged tied to the NYC mafia.  Actually, the Gambino family is probably the best known mafia in the country, formerly headed by John Gotti.  It has hit hard times, as have all of the NYC mafia families, because of crimebusting operations that have reduced these outfits to shells of what they once were.  Still, I'm sure there are plenty of outfits that can afford the cost of buying a ref.  But is it worth it for them?

Is it profitable for an illegal outfit, whether a mafia or some sort of other mafia/mobs (Russian, drug cartel, 3-6, whatever) to spend $300,000 or more a year to "fix" basketball games?  The question is how would they capitalize on this "asset"?  If you knew tonight's insignificant NBA game was definitely going to go "over", could you make enough coin off of it to justify the investment?  How would you do it?

See, most outfits make their money by accepting bets from clients, basically playing the role of bookie.  They use the standard Vegas line (most bookies don't have to create the lines themselves anymore), and hope to get equal action on both sides of the bet so that they offset each other, and the bookie keeps the 5% fee or whatever they charge for placing a bet with them.  It's the safest way for a bookie to insure a profit.  Fixing a game doesn't make a difference to an outfit that acts as a bookie, since they don't care which side wins.  It's doubtful they would adjust their spreads or lines they offer their clientale because they had insider info... wouldn't you be a little suspicious if the newspaper had the NYG +3.5, but your bookie was had the NYG +7?

Now, the insider info could make a difference to bettors.  The outfit doesn't just have to act as a bookie, they can act as a client, too.  But who would they make their bets with?   You got it, Vegas.  It also has the added benefit of "laundering" the money, making it seem like legit earnings, if they can get winnings from bets placed in Vegas.

So let's say tonight's Pistons-Bulls game has an over/under of 185.  The great Slate article about this topic suggests that is the typical game Tim Donaghy fixed:

"He reffed 12 games in which the over/under was 184.5 or less - those games went over 10 out of 12 times, a highly suspicious number... This makes sense intuitively.  In a low-scoring game, a quick whistle would ensure that each team get enough free throws to sufficiently pad the point total."

So tonight's game is a low-scoring game, right.  Your outfit knows that tonight's ref is Tim Donaghy, and that he's going to make sure the game is going over.  You lay down some money in Vegas on the "over".  How much money do you have to lay down on the "over" in a regularly season NBA game (not even NFL!) before Vegas gets suspicious?

Vegas' casinos are on top of all kinds of illegal activities, and sniffing them out:

"Any suspicious bets taken on college campuses or the corner bar get reported back to Vegas sports books, not the local district attorney. Think back to the point-shaving scandal that hit college football this spring. A Vegas oddsmaker thought the betting activity on University of Toledo games looked suspicious. He blew the whistle to the NCAA, and an investigation ultimately revealed Toledo players' connections to a Michigan gambler. That's how game-fixing gets snuffed out—usually."

It doesn't delve into specifics, but the point is clear: even if your outfit was smart, and broke up your bet into a thousand little bets, it would draw suspicion.  Let's look at it realistically, first: How would you place, say, a $50,000 bet (the minimum it would make sense for an outfit that is paying a ref at least $300,000 to fix games)?  You could have 500 people place $100 bets, which would be very unlikely to draw attention, at first anyway.  If you are smart, you'll break it up over as many casinos and bookies as you can.  Where you would get 500 people to bet $100 in Vegas,  I don't know, but that's besides the point.  Presuming you could pull it off, you might be able to fly under the radar.

Until Vegas notices that almost every time Tim Donaghy refs a low scoring game, it goes over, and there is unusually heavy betting activity (aggregate) on the "over".

Did Vegas know or suspect anything about Tim Donaghy?  Possibly.  We don't know, because they aren't exactly sharing their knowledge with outsiders.   And, as the article pointed out, the NBA doesn't want to work with Vegas (a short-sighted decision that will probably be reconsidered now).  But Vegas doesn't have to report anything or make it public;  if they have a suspicion on what's going on, they could maybe tip off some feds or something if they really feel strongly about it.  Nobody knows more about the ins and outs of basketball scoring patterns, and what's unusual, than a professional oddsmaker.  

So the final question is: Could Vegas buy a ref?  Indeed, they could.  They are the only outfit that has enough money to pay a ref off, and still make a tidy profit.   Who would they profit off?  I don't know, they could make the under very appealing... say, raise a low scoring game that should have a line of 184.5 to 200 pts, and hope smart gamblers gravitate to the low, so they can make a cleaning when the game scores over 210 points.  That's a reach, though.  And more importantly, what's their motivation?  Unless the action on the NBA games could yield millions of dollars in profit above their normal take, why bother?  Quote Jay-Z: "If ya'll not talking about large money, what's the point?"

But wait, you might ask: This whole post doesn't make sense.  We know Tim Donaghy is busted for fixing games!  

My point is this:  Here's a referee who got into heavy gambling debt with the mob.  He had to work for them, which means they got him for cheap (whatever his debt was), as oppose to outright "buying" him clean.  He did this to himself, put himself into this position.  The mafia didn't come to him and buy him; he pretty much cause this situation on his own, thanks to his gambling problems.

And I'm pretty sure that, despite all the rumors about "naming other officials and players" that people want to see, and the "NBA is fixed" storylines you might read, here is the deal:  I highly doubt this is anything but an isolated incident.  It could be that there are other refs caught up in this, but it seems very unlikely.  The only way another ref could be involved is if he, too, had a gambling problem and was indebted to the mob.  Buying NBA refs is financially unfeasible for most mobs. It might makes sense to buy NFL refs, since they are lower paid and the stakes is higher (more money is bet on the NFL), but not an NBA ref.

The NBA might be fixed by David Stern (that's a different topic, but I'm not the Sportsguy), but by outside forces... in my opinion, unlikely.

I don't know, that's my take. What do you guys think?

Prime Time Time: 

How are NBA referees hired?

Let's take a look at some answers from the NBA Referees' website:

Q.  What do I have to do to become a NBA referee?
A.  In a recent interview with Referee Magazine, Joe Borgia, the NBA official responsible for recruiting and hiring referees for the NBA, the WNBA, and the NBA's Developmental League, described how the NBA goes about hiring professional basketball officials:

"I, along with our management team, watch a lot of officials. We go to camps to identify possible candidates. We go to college tournaments with the logic that the best officials in each conference are working those tournaments. I think last year I attended 30 games in nine days within six states. That was only me, we had many others out there watching on behalf of the NBA. I simply am trying to identify one or two officials who might have future potential within our league. We also have NBA-sponsored camps in which we invite candidates who we have seen work to get a look at them more closely. At that time, we can decide whether that official would be a good fit for our D-League. From this time forward, any official that works in the NBA or WNBA will first work in the D-League."

Q.  I know that the NBDL is the official developmental league for the NBA. Is the CBA still considered an official developmental league for the NBA? In addition, are referees who aspire to go into the NBA still sent to the CBA? It appears to me that the route to the NBA is going through the NBDL or CBA and then the WNBA before a referee goes to the NBA. Is this observation accurate?

A.  In the past, officials would filter to the NBA through the WNBA and the college circuit, but these days the sift is coming primarily through the NBA's Developmental League (NBADL), and secondarily through the college route.

Conclusion?  Getting into the NBA has an official probably requires an "in" of some sort.   There are examples of referees who have family members in the officiating field, either with the NBA or in other sports; also, as mentioned in the comments, Joey Crawford, Tim Donaghy and two other NBA officials all attended the same high school in Pennsylvania.  How odd that they all ended up as NBA referees.  Either that high school has a special program for training refs, or the alumni connection carries weight. 

It's not unusual for networking to play a big part in getting jobs - people hire people who are recommended by fellow employees.  Also worth noting: The Marathon Man added a good point in our discussion of this topic; he knows a referee in the ACC.  It's a cushy gig - he doesn't have to travel as much (the furthest he goes from home is Florida), as it's all local.  It's better for family-oriented people.  We might think that a NBA ref job is super appealing, but it's not.  NCAA Div 1 refs get paid really well (Big East refs I know do well), don't have as much travel, and have a shorter season (with less stress).  It's not a bad gig, and only really motivated refs (or those with big egos) would even want to move on to the NBA.

How much do refs get paid?

This one is difficult.  There is very little info about this - over the last couple of days I've read estimates from $100,000-$250,000, and other estimates have been higher (the highest I've heard is $400,000).   One of the reasons it is probably hard to figure out is because refs have other sources of income besides the games.  The job seems to be full time (as opposed to NFL refs, which are classified as part time and some refs have other jobs).  There are workshops and conference which these refs hold; they are probably getting some coin for that.  There are appearances, lectures, etc.  Some referees get into the memorabilia industry.   Freebies count as income.   Bottom line:  they are making six figures on average.  They are all living comfortable lifestyles - almost every single referee I've read about has a nice house in the suburbs that is worth a good amount.  I don't think refereeing is a poor paying job... if anything, it's akin to a doctor or a lawyer.

"NFL officials earned the least amount of money compared with other major North American sports referees. A National Basketball Association referee, on average, currently boasts a salary of $180,000 (B199,000) - that is more than quadruple the wages of an NFL referee."

That was from a 2001 article. 

"The bottom line is referees don’t make enough money either. NBA refs roughly earn between $100,000 and $300,000 a year"

That was from CNBC today.  By the way, the author doesn't make it clear why it isn't enough money, or how much is enough.  How much should the NBA pay it's referees?  There are 60 NBA referees; at $200,000 average per year, that is $12 million dollars the NBA is spending on refs, not counting benefits... which tend to be around 60% of salary & benefits in most organizations, but could be less in the NBA because who knows what type of benefits the NBA has.  Do they have a 401K?  Dental and medical?  Don't know.  But I'm going to safely assume that the NBA is spending at least $15 million on referees.

How many fouls do NBA refs call? 

As we saw from the racial bias study earlier this season, the NBA does not track fouls called by individuals, but by crew.  So here's some data:

There were 45.4 fouls per game (based on 22.7 per team average last season).

In the playoffs it rose to 46 fouls per game, based on this Bodog article.  That article is worth noting because it also gets into disputable refereeing and free throw discrepencies; it's too bad for Bodog that it wasn't Ken Mauer who was the gambler, for then they could pat themselves on the back instead of Bill Simmons:

The performance of referees Joe DeRosa, Ken Mauer and Steve Javie over the final 12 minutes on Monday left even the most milquetoast Jazz fans red in the face. Conspiracy?

San Antonio enjoyed a 25-2 free throw disparity in the fourth quarter, scoring 19 of their 28 points in the period from the charity stripe. Meanwhile, the Jazz were whistled for 11 fouls, four technicals and two ejections.

Of course, they realize that the conspiracy talk is just unhappy fans, and give the reasons why the game wouldn't be "fixed":

While the Spurs have been benefactors of several dubious decisions this postseason, the idea that David Stern is pulling strings on another San Antonio finals appearance is a tough sell.

Not much is gained from a vanilla, ratings-killer like the Spurs advancing to the dance. The problem is far more inherent, and nothing new. NBA officiating stinks.

Then they get into the reasons why the Spurs get so many calls - Suns fans and Bill Simmons, please take note:

They’ve got a well-schooled assemblage of call contesters; one can imagine Tim Duncan leading team exercises in bug-eyed looks of disbelief, or Manu Ginobili practicing his turned-up-palms-who-me? routine in the mirror prior to game time.

For as good as they are at complaining about fouls, the Spurs are even more adept at drawing them. San Antonio is the only team in the playoffs to boast three players in the top ten free throws attempts, an amazing stat when you consider six of their games came against Phoenix, a team notorious for not taking fouls.

Duncan (117) trails only LeBron James (134) while Ginobili has upped his regular season average of 4.9 to 5.6 attempts per playoff game.

San Antonio’s South American and European influence does play a part in this, as five of the 15 players on the Spurs’ playoff roster were born outside the United States. The likes of Ginobili, Tony Parker and Fabricio Oberto cut their teeth playing in European leagues that accentuate bumps and simulate physical contact – often times where there is none.

There's your fix, Suns fans.  Sorry, still sucks, but at acknowledge that it's probably more likely that your team lost because the Spurs are better actors than your team, which has only one really flapper - Steve Nash.  Add some more Euros, and maybe you'll have a chance of getting to the Finals next season. 

Finally, where does Tim Donaghy rank among referees in calls?

Foxsports is all over this one.  Some good info:  Over the last two years (Tim Donaghy's suspect period), he's been #1 among officials in technical fouls and #2 in personal fouls.  He averaged 47.7 fouls, above the league average of 45.  Of course, his 47.7 isn't abnormally deviating from the league average; remember, just because he's second highest doesn't mean he's abnormal... he's within a very acceptable one standard deviation from the norm.  He appears to be within the league quota (as we wrote about yesterday, there is a "league quota" on fouls to be called, which is around 45-46).

However, he's way above the league average (1.78) in techincal fouls called.  A lot of the quotes from coaches is that "he had a quick temper", which would seem to support that he liked to blow his whistle on technicals faster than most referees.  It could also be that he liked to call other T's, such as for illegal defense (not called any more), for delay of games, etc.  But almost all technicals are for temper tantrums.  And so we attribute this abnormality to one or more factors:  he could be quick to blow the whistle because he is a hot head himself (as backed up by his reported run-ins with neighbors and mailmen); or he was looking for quick free throws to run up the score.  The best way to tell if the second is a factor (not to mention as a good way to see if his regular foul calls is suspect) is to compare the data from this two year period to his career averages, particularly his recent career.

Okay, we are all out of questions.  Um, so random YouTube video followed by personal stories?:

Yeah, that was Careless Whisper.  It reminds me of my second favorite story from Lebanon.  My first?  Being at dinner party with my friend, who worked for the BBC, and a bunch of foreign news reporters in Beirut, when a car bomb went off less than a mile away.  No big deal, I kinda knew what it was right away (what, I'm not from a warzone, but I'm from the hood... I know the sound of "oh sh*t"), but 60% of the party took off right away to get the story.  

The second best story?  The friend who worked locally for the BBC was telling us about a documentary on the Ayatollah Khomeini he saw while staying in a hotel in Iran.  The documentary was all about his life and times, and was pretty standard state-sponsored propaganda.  But then near the end, they showed footage of the Ayatollah on his deathbed, and his son leaning over as Khomeini whispered something in ear.  Suddenly Careless Whisper started playing over the rest of the scene.  Taking the translation a little too literal.

Okay, now I'm done for real.   

Now, it's pretty unusual of me to defend the bad guy, but I don't think there is anything more to this than an upset Suns fan who still hasn't gotten over his team's lose.  I don't have a preference for either the Suns or Spurs, so I think I can keep it objectionable.  Here are my chief complaints with the video (I'll get to my complaints about Simmons article in a bit):

• Okay, the first foul call is the most damning.  It was clearly made by Tim Donaghy, and it's the infamous "late whistle" call on the Suns that occurred about three seconds after Ginobili drove to the basket and missed.  No argument here, it was a late call, definitely; it was a bad call, definitely; and Tim Donaghy made it.  Both Simmons and the guy behind the video had to start their case on this one call, because this is the best definite "example"....
• The next one (starting at the 2:00 mark) is Amare getting blocked by Duncan.  He looks like he got fouled, but it's a borderline call.  On the one hand, Duncan went across Amare's body; but he did also get all ball.  Furthermore Amare didn't "sell" the foul, as he barely seemed to break stride when Duncan went across his body - he went off balance as the block occurred (at this point it's a clean block, since the possible foul already occurred but was missed).  This happened in front of referee Rush's point of view, so if he didn't call it, perhaps Donaghy didn't feel the need to call it either.  It seems borderline at best.
  
• Amare's offensive foul (2:30) - this one has nothing to do with Donaghy!  He didn't call it for one.  Two, Oberto fell to the ground, forcing a call.  Yes, you can call it a flop, that's reasonable.  But a ref has to make a call when someone goes down on the court - either he calls the offensive foul, or he ignores the large forward on the floor.  Most refs would make that call, and, like I said... it wasn't Donaghy who made the call.  In other words, this piece of "evidence" is inadmissable.  (Totally a flop, though)
• 3:10: The Nash blocking foul as he got in Tim Duncan's way.  Not sold on this one, either.  Nash gets over and "plants" his feet when Tim Duncan's on top of him.  By definition he's probably too late, and it's a blocking foul.  Again, because Nash hit the floor, something needs to be called.  He tried to pull the charge on Duncan, but get the charge requires his position to be established.  I can't say that, upon viewing the replay, I strongly believe his position was established - he looks like he is still moving.  Also, not sure which ref blew the whistle and made the call (it appears to be the one in the baseline, which might not be Donaghy - I'm not sure).  By the way, I remember thinking the announcing crew was nuts when I watched this game the first time (I figured they were strongly rooting for the Suns)... "you don't have to have your feet set...".  Um, actually - yes you do. 
• 3:55:  Diaw's foul on Duncan.  There was clearly contact, and Tim Duncan went down to the floor, with the ball in his hands.  The referees had to call something.  Again, we're not sure who made the call.  Secondly, the call has to be either a foul on Diaw for running into Duncan, or a foul on Duncan for sticking his hip out.  On a pick, you might see that call go against Duncan.  But since he had the ball in his hand and was making a move - very rarely will that call go against the offensive player, since he is not setting a pick, but actually making a move.  The offensive player making a move has the right to the space, and unless Diaw was planted there with his feet set, he's not drawing the offensive foul call.  Again, this seemed pretty common sense to us at the time, and still makes sense. 
  
• 4:20 - the Bruce Bowen offensive foul on Steve Nash.  Bowen basically knees Nash in the leg.  The refs called it.  What's the problem?  Is it that the Suns think it should have been an intentional foul?  That's ridiculous - the league calls intentional fouls almost exclusively on layups that have too much contact in the head or upper body area.  That's pretty much it.  Yes, Bowen is a d*ck, I hate him.  He's dirty.  He probably did it intentionally, and should be shanked with a rusty shiv.  But the foul was called, and that's that.  This foul is similar to Kobe's elbows on his follow-through - they get reviewed by the league after the game, and result in action at that point (I think Bowen got a fine for this one).  Determining intent during the game is sometimes too difficult.  Again, three referees, no one else upgrade it to an intentional foul, either.  Inadmissable!
• And after throwing out all this half-ass examples of evidence, you want something strong to finish with... so you get the no-call on Bowen stripping Nash.  Yes, it looked like Nash got fouled, I agree.  It was a bad no-call, but again...  all three refs let it go.  As evidence of Donaghy (acting alone) controlling the outcome of the game... very weak.  Did he bribe the other two refs into turning a blind eye to this call?  Maybe their family was being threatened, too?  As for the technical foul on D'Antoni - one, we're not sure which ref called the T.  Two... um, it's probably legit.  Mike D'Antoni was mad pissed, and he probably said the magic words to warrant a T.  Even the announcers commended him on taking one for his best player.  Can anyone dispute that he deserved that technical?  Maybe, but not on these grounds.  The bad no-call though is admissable.
• The last is another no call that went against Steve Nash, but... it happened (as the video and announcers both make evident) in Rush's face.  He didn't make the call.  What does this have to do with Tim Donaghy's gambling problem?

And people think my "Francisco Garcia is why Reggie Theus got hired" theory is ludicrious?!?  Okay, that's one problem with the Simmons article - it's just an excuse to pat himself on the back.  The other big problem I had with Simmons' article?  He kept calling NBA referees underpaid.  That gets a little annoying after a while.  Listen, NBA officials make up to $400,000 a year.  It's safe to say that Tim Donaghy wasn't making top coin, but he probably was making at least $250,000, I would say, for a seasonally job.  He's also been a referee for 13 seasons.  The dude isn't poor.  He might have more wealth than some NBA players.   

You know what, that reminds me - Joey Crawford is probably making top coin.  He's been around 30 years, too.  He's probably made more money in his time in the NBA than Sebastian Telfair has.  That's meaningless I know, but whereas Telfair is a "spoiled rich athlete", no one has ever said something similar to Crawford.  The media perception is that these guys are "everymen", just regular middle class guys, guys who are similar to those umpires at the softball games, or referees at the little league game or rec league b-ball leagues.  Yeah, NBA officials are to rec league b-ball leagues what NBA players are to the players in those leagues!  No comparison in skill or compensation levels.  So stop with the everyman comparisons.  

Tim Donaghy is a millionaire (he has to be worth at least $1,000,000) who had a gambling problem that cost him his job and possibly made him fix professional NBA games.  

Oh, and by the way - that Kurt Thomas trade?  That's because the Suns are cheap.  I don't knock getting rid of Kurt Thomas, he's not a big part of the team.  I think giving away another pair of 1st rounders is ridiculous, though.  One should have been sufficient; two is just being cheap.  Eventually this is going to come back to bite the Suns in the ass.  Those assets are going to be missed, including Kurt Thomas, a defense-oriented player the Suns need more of.  The Spurs are cheap, too, as evidenced by their Jackie Butler trade.  But there is a difference: The Spurs are champs.  Their cheapness might make repeating difficult, but at least they have something to show for their team's cheapness.

The Suns won't have anything to show for it.  They are going to have to change this team after this season... Marion will get traded.  The #1 from Atlanta will be used, either as trade bait or to acquire a top rookie.  We doubt Bo Diaw will stay around if he doesn't have a big season this year. The 08-09 Suns will have a different look.  But the 07-08 Suns, the last of the Nash-Amare-Marion years, will end short of the Finals like all the rest.  Historically they will have no value.  They will just be a fun team that we enjoyed watching these years, one that changed the thinking of the league, but that amounted to nothing more than empty fury.  The Suns will be like the Alex English high scoring Denver Nuggets teams of the 80's - a nice fun team to watch, great stats and great fantasy players, but nothing significant.  Maybe the new version of the Suns in 08-09 will actually become a significant contender and make it to the Finals.  Or maybe they'll stop being so cheap, and pay the needed money to put them over the top.

Before we delve into this, let's once again make the statement:  He's not being accused (yet) of determining who wins or loses.  If he did bet on games that he officiated (the NY Times reports he is believed to have "altered" 10-15 games, all since December), we don't know what kind of bets he made - spreads, over/under, others - or how many.  A few news reports also include stories about "suspicious" games he's officiated - "the Knicks shot 39 FTs to the Heats' 8 FTs", for example.  Which means, what, he wanted the Knicks to cover?  Maybe he wanted the over?  Once again, as we always advocate here - don't jump to any conclusions just yet.

"At this point, it's too early to know if any games were affected," said John Avello, an oddsmaker from Vegas.

What we do know is that he is suspected of involvement with the mafia, and of placing bets with them.  We know he had a gambling problem.  The Daily News is reporting that the league had "previously confronted" Tim Donaghy about his suspected gambling problem.  He was "ordered to the league's offices in New York" but "he was allowed to continue officiating games because NBA honchos did not suspect he was gambling on games or fixing the contests".

The NBA has a real problem now.  First off, why would you ever let a person you believe has a gambling problem officiate your league?  I guess if he's betting on the lotto or horse racing or playing poker, it's okay.  But come on... if he's betting on anything else sports-related, like let's say football games, then don't you think he might be a risk?  Especially if he's betting big money?  The NBA should have exercised a little bit more caution there.

The problem isn't Tim Donaghy himself - this came out on a Friday, and he could easily be forgotten quickly, before the season begins in October, believe it or not.  But the perception of NBA referees has always been a bigger problem for the NBA than any of the other sports league.  If the goal of an official is to not be known, the NBA has failed.  Where as I might struggle to remember any MLB umpires (none come to mind right now), and only one NFL referee (Ed Hochili, he of the biceps and internet fame), no less than a half-dozen NBA referees immediately spring to mind.  Almost all for the same reasons - they are well known for their incompetence or because fans/players/coaches/Mark Cuban have complained about them in the past - Dick Bavetta, Violet Palmer, Joey Crawford, Bennett Salvatore, Joe Derosa, Tommy Nunez, Steve Javie, Bob Delaney... all off the top of the head. Wow.

It doesn't help the NBA that they've had race bias among NBA officials discussion, a NBA referee kicked out the league (and recently reinstated) for abnormal behavior, including challenging one of the most well-liked players in the league to a fight, and now a referee accused of betting on and perhaps fixing games he officiated.  There are already way too many fans that believe the league is actively involved in determining who wins games.  That's very unlikely, but there is no doubt among a large amount of fans that there is an inconsistency to refereeing.  Superstars get calls - see this splendid D-Wil post for not only his first hand take on some NBA referees, but also for the excerpt from Jason Flemings' article.  It sums up the perception (or reality) problem that the NBA is facing.

Perception should never be a problem - it generally tends to only effect a small % of your audience.  But you know who is to blame for the popularization of this perception, the perception that the NBA is riddled with corruption?  Bill Simmons.  He's the one who popularized the theory that David Stern fixes lotteries (not just the Knicks '85 draft, either; he's also mentioned possible fixes a million times as jokes in other contexts... for example, when AI was traded last year, he joked that David Stern must have promised them the #1 pick this year).  He's the one that has made some of those officials well known names, including Dick Bavetta and Violet Palmer.  He's made it okay to criticize NBA refs by names, but has never done that in other contexts.  For example, all the times he's spoken about the Brady "tuck rule" game, I don't the NFL referees' names have ever come up.  I could be wrong, but I don't think so.  All the other blown calls there have been in football over the years, he's never mentioned a refs' name, at least that's my impression.  Someone else can verify whether that is actually correct or not.

I'm not saying Bill Simmons shouldn't be writing what he's written in the past.  I'm fine with everything he's said regarding NBA officials and David Stern, and agree with most of it.  I'm just saying that's the reason the perception of shadiness has become so... mainstream.  He popularized it.  

The problems I've always had with officials in all leagues is that there is little turnover in their ranks.  On the one hand, this is a necessary ill - new referees are inconsistent; they tend to have more difficulties earning the respect of players and coaches, which leads to uneasy situations; and they are novices, relative to the rest of the referees; they make more bad calls and mistakes, and are more likely to lose control of a situation.  See Violet Palmer for an example of what I mean.  And keep in mind she's been a referee for 10 years now, and yet he style is still considered very erratic. 

But because NBA officials have low turnover rates, too many hang on for way too long.  The result is that officials become out of touch with players; they become set in their ways; bottom line, they become curmudgeonly.  If you want to check out our sidebar on Joey Crawford, and how we think he views the NBA, read our next post.

Becoming an NBA official is also a difficult task - it pays well, but the path to the NBA requires lots of patience.  You might toil in the NCAA or WNBA or other leagues for a long time.  Often it seems like everyone who is an official has some refereeing bloodlines.  I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, and am not going to sort through too many bios right now, but NBA officiating seems to run in the family.

What all these things mean to me is this: It takes a long time for an official to break in, and then to get good, and by the time they are finally peaking, they are no longer interested or in love with the game.  Those with family ties might not even love or care for the job as much as it's just inheriting the family business, so to speak.  That makes them even more vulnerable to human faults.  And the NBA hasn't doing a great job of taking these kinds of things serious... they really need to keep more checks on their referees.  Not to suggest they spy on them, but Tim Donaghy had lots of issues, has the Daily News reports:

The NBA referee has been at the center of ugly incidents on court and off - with his ex-neighbors in Pennsylvania calling him a "sociopath."  It started with the ref, a married father of four, chasing Lisa around the golf course, shouting obscenities at her, resulting in his suspension from the club.

He then supposedly "set fire to their tractor, drove their golf cart into a ravine and ignited a blaze on their deck."

When the couple's 5-year-old son threw mudballs onto Donaghy's property, the ref demanded cops arrest the child, the Mansuetos said.

The court papers said Donaghy had been arrested in the past - in 1995 and 2002 - for stalking and harassing others.

That last line really bring it on home.  I get the neighbor problems, you can almost let that slide as an isolated series of events.  But twice being arrested for stalking?!?  You could get kicked out the NFL for that!

There is also the well reported case of his altercation with Rasheed Wallace, who was suspended for 7 games for his "confrontation" of Tim Donaghy.  While that event happened before the time frame that is being investigated by the FBI, it shows you what happens when you jump to conclusions.  A lot of the coverage of Rasheed Wallace at the time was in a negative scope - "oh, the big black athlete attacked a ref... that damn animal should be kicked out of the league already!"  Now how does it look?  Think maybe a competitor like Rasheed Wallace might be a little miffed if he felt the game was being called unfairly?  What if he was right?  

This story may or may not have legs, but the NBA really needs to address this.  Even if it isn't fair, and other leagues maybe have worse officiating, the NBA is the one with the problem right now (sort of like how MLB has the steroid problem, not the NFL), and therefore they need to do something about it.  What, I don't know yet.  Oh, one more article and quote: 

Today, many refs feel that the league's minders are more concerned that the referees hit specific foul "quotas" than make accurate calls -- and that this strategy threatens the integrity of the game. "You gotta hit certain numbers more than anything," says one current NBA referee, who has been in the league for over a decade and declined to be identified. (The officials' collective bargaining agreement prohibits them from speaking to the media without the NBA's permission.) He says a "vast number" of officials make certain calls "just so they don't become an 'outlier' on the stat sheet."

That's from this website.  Again, it shows how the NBA, in trying to tackle their inconsistency officiating problem in the past perhaps even made it worse.  Time for a new approach....

But the highlight of this post isn't Starbury addressing his trolls, or talking about how he's high off life (I'm thinking Steph has found God or something)... it's this line:

You want to make me the clown…I’m not the dude on the ESPYs, getting carried on a throne. I’m not him. I’m the good guy, not the bad guy. I don’t want to be carried on the throne…I just want to walk among the people.

Not the first time Steph has called out LeBron James (that's the guy on the throne at the ESPYs), but implying he's a "clown" and "the bad guy" is definitely a new level in their little feud.  Remember that it was LeBron who fired a little barb at Marbury last year, saying he couldn't imagine endorsing a $15 sneaker like Marbury.  "No, I don't think so," James said. "Me being with Nike, we hold our standards high."

At the time, it lead to this Marbury response: "I'd rather own than be owned."

I said it before: F*ck Nike's "standards".  I've owned lots of Nikes in my time, and they fall apart just as easily as the Starbury's (which have lasted me a pretty long time, surprisingly).  My $100 Nikes (that's $100 in the 90's, when that was the price for top line sneakers, including the Pippens, which were dope, and short-lived Garnetts) have fallen apart in all kinds of ways.  But I digress. 

This is good for the Knicks, in that at least the team can unite around their mutual dislike of LeBron.  Quentin Richardson might dislike King James even more so than Marbury, and it shows in his play, as he often outplays LeBron in head to head meetings.

One of the knocks against the old 90's Knicks, as hinted at by their own coach, Jeff van Gundy, is that Jordan would buddy up to people to get an edge on them.  Patrick Ewing didn't despise Jordan - in fact he agreed to a role in Space Jams, Jordan's movie (cue "I Believe I Can Fly").  So did Larry Johnson.  And Charles Oakley?  He's still rolling with Jordan everywhere he goes, forever at his side.  How much hate do you think that Knicks' team really had for Jordan?  Nowhere near as much hate as they did for the Heat, that's for sure.

So hating the King might not be such a bad thing.  Let's hope Zach Randolph starts bitching about the night LeBron stole a stripper he was talking to, and maybe this team can really gel....

PS:  I fully expect Seth to come up with reasons for why every other Knick should hate LeBron over at P&T this weekend....

Oh, double bonus: Since we are talking about Space Jams, and I did forget to post a video this week, here you go:

You know, if I did polls on my site, I might do a poll on who got off the best rhyme in this posse joint. I would be tempted to vote for B Real, if only because those were like his best rhymes ever. It's the equivalent of a having a career year in baseball. Of course, everyone came hard. And I always picture Renaldo Balkman tearing up the locker room before every Knick game like Busta does in this video. With the ski goggles on.

Over the past two years I’ve probably watched somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 NBA games. That number may be low, but we’ll go with 200. In pretty much every game, I saw a ref make a call that I absolutely did not agree with. We all have. Bad calls are a part of the game. Rules are subjective in basketball more than any other sport (unless we’re talking about the leaving the bench rule, that one’s black and white). If the reports are true, and Tim Donaghy was fixing games, it’s going to be really hard to let horrible calls roll off my back come next season. I don’t think I’m going to be alone, either.

Fans are close to the floor, players are physical, argumentative, and in some cases blatantly unstable. I don’t know what’s going to happen if Joey Crawford tosses Tim Duncan for smiling at him in a close game. It could be pandemonium. The shadow of doubt this scandal (whether proven true, or false) will cast on the NBA is going to take a long time to recover from.

There is a precedent for this in professional sports, Pete Rose in baseball and also Eugenia Williams in boxing. Rose was seen as a sick individual, and he was never charged with betting on games. It wasn’t a systematic problem in baseball. Plus, there was always the belief that Rose bet ON his team. In reality, this doesn’t make much of a difference, but when I think about it there’s an odd sentimentality to it that I can’t shake. OK, the guy bet on baseball, but betting on yourself to win doesn’t sound that wrong. Phil Mickelson does it all the time in golf. Obviously, the ramifications of a manager betting on his team to win could be drastic, so I’m not condoning it by any means. I’m just saying, it wasn’t this bad.

In sports, sometimes it’s a naive assumption that the umps and refs are impartial, but it is one we all make. Do refs and umps have personalities, play favorites, get influenced by home crowds? Absolutely. But the assumption has always been that they don’t have a vested interest in the outcome of the game. A missed call wasn’t missed because the ref wanted (or maybe needed) a certain team to win, or cover the point spread. If this rumor is true, or even if it isn’t, that assumption will no longer be there. Referees will no longer be beyond reproach.

I hope, for the sport’s sake, that this isn’t true. Short of that, if it is true, I hope that Donaghy is where this scandal ends. If his isn’t the last referee’s name we hear, the NBA will be in serious trouble. The quickest way to ruin a sport is to take away its integrity. David Stern has policed players and coaches with an iron fist when it comes to questioning the refereeing of games. Fines were automatic. I wonder if he’s going to return any fine money for comments made about Donaghy’s blown calls.

Coming off the worst finals in the history of the league, David Stern and the league can ill-afford this scandal, but here it is. Mr. Stern has a long road ahead of him, and I’m not sure how he’s going to erase the shadow of a doubt from the minds of his players, coaches and most importantly, fans.

My biggest fear is that this whole thing is going to blow up and turn into a “Santa Clause isn’t real?” moment for all of us. Let’s hope it ends with Donaghy, I don’t want the NBA to turn out to be the WWE.

"Kermit Washington, he's the one that put all of this together.  He's the one who had the famous fight with Rudy Tomjanovich, and he's deeply sorry about that.  But he put all this together.  He has an AIDS clinic right in the middle of the slums."

"Kermit built a classroom for young HIV kids. He's doing a great job giving them medicine."

In his phone call to Berger, Ron Artest talks a lot about Larry Jones:

"Larry Jones has a community center in the middle of the slums, and a slum meaning, people live in dirt.

And we also met little babies that their mothers abandoned. They brought them over to Larry Jones' complex in the slums, and some of the babies had broken legs, broken arms, heads damaged. And Larry Jones is just taking care of all of these babies, as many as he can. He's actually going to help me get an orphanage in my name in Kenya. I appreciate that. It's pretty creepy right here."

That last sentence definitely sounds out of place, but keep in mind Ron called from a tent near Nairobi, at 4 AM.  So cut him some slack for being on some Blair Witch sh*t... I know my urban ass would also be creeped out if I was camping in Kenya.  Or anywhere else.   Hell, being in the country freak me out... all the quiet, the crickets!

Oh, Larry Jones is the founder of Feed The Children, an organization that does a lot of work in Africa.  They are apparently teaming up with Kermit Washington's organization (Project Contact) on this trip.  Feed The Children is "an international nonprofit organization providing aid and assistance to children and families in need in the U.S. and around the world."  According to their website, Feed The Children joined forces with Taiwan and the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA) to create the "Feeding One Million" initiative to provide 5,000 metric tons (11 million pounds) of rice to aid victims of the drought in Kenya.  The government of Taiwan donated the rice.  This isn't the first time the government of Taiwan has donated rice to help Feed The Children do it's work in Africa.

More Artest:

"When the sun comes up, the guards come and they have their guns and stuff because we have hippopotamuses right next to us. You know, hippopotamuses kill people. So it was pretty freaky. We had bats in our tent. The guards come and wake you up. They give you wake-up calls, you know, just, "Wake up!" There's no phones or nothing. They escort you around the property.

There's monkeys. Oh, my goodness. Elephants have come around here. Bats, mongoose, it's so crazy. So crazy. Cheetahs and lions are like literally right down the street and they can get in here. It's so crazy like that.

We went over the gate right next to where the crocodiles and the hippopotamuses were, and I almost fell in the damn lake. I was scared for my damn life. In my mind, I was like, "What would have happened if I fell up in there?" So I had to make sure I don't walk too far past that gate."

Like I said, I'm a city guy.  Me and Ron Artest actually grew up in almost identical places - he grew up in the Queensbridge Houses, I grew up Alphabet City - at around the same time (I'm actually older - I remember watching Artest when he was a freshman at LaSalle, while rooting for Shammgod Wells).  So yeah, I find bats, cheetahs, lions a little freaky, too.  I like how he said "fell up in there"... apparently Ron Artest's clumsiness defies the laws of gravity.  But on the real, I can totally relate to his unease with that kind of nature. 

Ken Berger also has collected some great quotes from Artest on other topics, including his relationship with the Kings' owners.  Or really, their mom:

"The Maloofs, Mama [Colleen] Maloof, she's been a beautiful lady, a beautiful friend to me. All the Maloofs have been good people to me. So that's what the people of New York City don't really see. They only see a player. They see an opportunity for a trade. But it's important that I tell them more so they really see what has to go into all of this."

Mama Maloof!  Oh, and Artest address the trade rumors involving the Knicks, particularly their supposed refusal to including David Lee in a trade:

"If some crazy scenario happened where I was with the Knicks, I would want David Lee there," Artest said. "I love David Lee. I played with him in the 'hood last summer, and he showed so much heart. They were trying to rough up David Lee, but David Lee got rough right back. And this was the projects, you know? And I respected that.

"I wouldn't trade myself for David Lee at all. I love his game. I love how he rebounds. To come off the bench and average close to 10 rebounds, you can't trade a guy like that. You don't trade a guy like David Lee, and Isiah made a great call. I would have done the same thing."

Great  quotes all around.  I'm hoping to check out some streetball this weekend, especially over at the Kingdome Classic (the one on 115th and Lennox), since it's near where I used to live and still spend a lot of time at (East Harlem).  Hopefully I can catch some NBAers at the games. 

But a larger point I want to make is this:  Ron Artest's reputation as a trouble maker is well known, and well documented.  It's well deserved, too - I won't argue too much if you want to call Ron a "thug".  It's ironic that he's rolling with Kermit Washington, in that the two of them have each been involved in the two worst incidents of on-court violence in the NBA's history.  And they have both been demonized for their involvement, whether fair or unfair.  

But let's also remember that Ron Artest is now 26 and getting older.  It reminds me of what I've said before about another "thug" -  Allen Iverson.  AI is now 30, man.  He's a family guy.  He's not the same guy who got into a brawl at 15, or did the crazy things that he did at 20, or even 25.  People get older, and they mellow out.  

Growing up in NYC, it's hard to let go of some of the things you have become conditioned to doing.  For example, I still can't ride the subway without keeping my guard up, okay?  I've been riding the subway since I was little, everyday, and I've seen a lot of stuff in my days.  On the subways I've seen people getting beat, robbed, smoking crack, sliced across the face with a razor (yes, I've seen that on the subway), you name it.  To this day, if I feel someone brush up against me, my first instinct is to check for my wallet.  It's years of conditioning.

Ron Artest and people like him (Iverson, Marbury, etc.) grow up in places that require building defensive mechanisms into your pysche.  I'm not giving him a free ride, or excusing his past transgressions.  Here's what I'm saying: Sometimes it takes a while to grow out of your old "bad" habits.  Sometimes it takes a long while (years) of living away from the scene, away from the trouble, to finally mellow out and lower your guard a bit.  Stephon Marbury has been getting a lot of slack lately because of his "odd behavior", but it seems to me like someone that has turned 30, and is finally accepting his new world.  Finally accepted that he made it out of the hood, and more importantly is trying to figure out how to thank the world for picking him to be the one. 

Marbury's story is especially interesting if you keep in mind all the previous Marbury brothers (he was the fourth, I believe), and their struggles as they tried to make it out the hood by being blessed with tremendous basketball skills.  Despite all their skills, everyone of Marbury's older brothers fell short of making it in the NBA, for various reasons.  I'll delve into his story some other time, but keep it in mind when you read about Marbury, and how happy he is now.  He's overcome obstacles, and made the most of his one opportunity, and did so with tremendous pressure on him, from his family to the entire neighborhood.  

Ron Artest is 26.  He's made mistakes even in his very recent past - he is suspended for the first seven games of next season, due to an assault & battery charge filed by his wife earlier this year.  This phone call or story doesn't mean that Ron Artest is suddenly wiser, or that he's learned from all his mistakes, or that he won't make another dumb decision down the road.  But maybe it a sign of someone realizing a bit more about the world, and his place in it, and how blessed he has been:          

"Some people, they're good guys and want to be bad boys," Artest said. "I've already got that hard core in me, but I'm trying to be a good guy. And I think I deserve to try to change the views of people about me."

I hope so, Ron.  

First off, this is a steal for the Rockets.  They get the best big man not in the NBA right now (Roy Hibbert might be #2), a proven baller.  Luis Scola played a huge role in the 2004 Olympics, leading Argentina to the gold medal.  He had a 10-11 FGA, 25 point, 11 rebound game in the final.  He's got a solid post game, though he's not a first option.  On the Rockets he won't have to be, though, not with Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady.

The Spurs basically gave him away to get rid of Jackie Butler's contract, which still has a few years left on it.  It was a bad signing, as Jackie Butler came to the Spurs out of shape and sat on the bench most of the year.  The reason for the trade, we argued, was for the Spurs to get under the luxury cap number.  The luxury cap threshold this year is $67.9 million; after making this trade, the Spurs' cap number is $67.65 million.  Pretty simple, right?  They get rid of a terrible contract - the Spurs are great at dumping mistakes immediately - and get under the luxury cap, too.  

Only one problem - in doing so they enhanced what has to be their biggest rival.  Aside from the fact that Houston is San Antonio's geographic competition, the Rockets were a team I felt could have competed last year.  The problem, as we argued in the comments over at Free Darko, was that the duo of Yao and T-Mac are good for 55 points, but who was going to chime in and get the other 30 points need to score the 85 points we figured they needed to win?  The rest of the team lacked a decent third option, much less depth.

Now take a look at that Rocket team. The starting point guard last year, Rafer Alston, is best coming off the bench and nailing threes; this season they add Mike James via trade, and we have a feeling he'll do well in new coach Rick Adelman's system.  Shane Battier is a glue guy, the kind every legit contender needs.  And Luis Scola gives them another option, a post guy who can do a little bit of damage.

It should be noted that Scola plays poor defense... no worries, though.  Yao has his back.  Mike James is a solid defender, too, and Battier makes the Rockets a tough team to score on (hence the 85 point goal from last season).  

The Spurs strengthened a key rival just to save a few bucks in the luxury tax (and, admittedly, to get rid of a long contract that sucked... we wish Isiah had done that with Jerome James before everyone realized what a stiff he is).  That a point that Martin Johnson also addresses in his post today for the NY Sun.  He takes on the Phoenix Suns, too, as an example of a team getting cheap and costing them talent.

With this in mind, here are the teams currently above the luxury tax threshold:

Minnesota is at 71.7 million
Phoenix is at 76 million
Denver is at 80 million.
Dallas is at 81 million.
New York is at 89 million. 

The Knicks and Dallas have owners who don't care much about paying the luxury tax.  But watch out for Phoenix again, which might still look to clear out $10 million somehow (hmm... isn't Golden State holding a trade exemption valued at that amount?   Shawn Marion might not make the Warriors happy, but maybe they can offer enough for Amare?)...

For the record, at this point we have the Rockets as our early favorites for next season, though it is far from a sure bet.

One last quick prediction: With Nate Robinson's value at an all time high, thanks to a solid performance in the summer league (where he was named The Most Outstanding Player), and the Knicks currently having 17 players signed, but only 15 roster positions available, look for him to get traded.  The most likely scenario is Robinson gets traded straight up for a future draft pick or gets combined with another Knick in a 2 for 1 deal.  Or maybe look for Dan Dickau or Fred Jones' expiring contracts to get moved....

The validity of this argument is debatable, but one thing I will give Brand, he’s produced a good movie. I saw his latest movie, Rescue Dawn this past weekend. Here’s the trailer.

I didn't go see the movie because Elton Brand produced it, I went because I'm a sucker for Vietnam movies and the main character's name is Dieter Dengler. I did notice Brand's name in the opening credits, but I thought it was a coincidence.

Francisco Garcia played at Louisville, and was a key player in their Final Four appearance in 2005.  According to the theory going around (and we should add that it's just a rumor), while Rick Pitino was the head coach, it was assistant coach Reggie Theus whom the players were raving about.  Garcia supposedly let management know that it was Reggie Theus who was breaking down game tapes, and preparing the game notes for every match, and was basically the real coach of that Louisville team.

After the Kings' first choice as coach, Stan Van Gundy, declined their job offer, it becomes unclear how Reggie Theus got the offer:

As for how Theus eventually wound up being the Kings' selection, even he isn't sure.
When Petrie and team co-owners Joe and Gavin Maloof arranged second interviews in the process, Theus was not among the selected. Lakers assistant Kurt Rambis and now Orlando coach Stan Van Gundy were called back to meet with the team's brass in Las Vegas. Kings assistant Scott Brooks was also called back for a second interview in Las Vegas. But after Van Gundy was offered the job, he bolted when the Magic called with a better offer and the Kings were left to continue on.

Not until then were Theus and Lakers assistant Brian Shaw asked to return, and both candidates met without Petrie and with the entire Maloof family in Las Vegas before Theus was hired.

So who the heck is Francisco Garcia, and why does his word carry so much weight?  Well, for starters, Garcia is well liked by the most important Kings teammates - he is best friends with Kevin Martin, the franchise player at the moment.  The Kings are big on Kevin Martin, who had a big breakout year last season.  They are also high on Francisco himself, and see him as a big part of their future.  Keeping Garcia happy also makes Kevin Martin happy.

Oh, and it makes one other key King player happy, too:  Ron Artest.  In a recent article by the NY Post's Marc Berman, he quotes Artest:

He said he doesn’t want to leave the friends he has made, such as Kevin Martin and two young fellow New Yorkers, Francisco Garcia and Quincy Douby.

So making Francisco Garcia happy not only helps the Kings with one of their young prospects, but it also makes the young stud (Kevin Martin) and the tempermental, but key, veteran (Ron Artest) happy, too. 

As for Francisco Garcia, what does his future entail?  Well, there are lots of people that believe he'll have a breakout season this year, like Kevin Martin did last year.  Perhaps that's why he switched agents.  According to the Sacramento Bee:

Francisco Garcia recently switched agents, leaving Jerome Lewis of Octagon to sign with power agent Aaron Goodwin.

Aaron Goodwin is no regular agent, mind you... his cliental is mostly filled with big names:  Chris Webber, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, Al Horford, and, of course, Nate Robinson.   N8 the GR8 aside, Goodwin generally deals with big dawgs; he must feel Garcia has a big payday in his immediate future for him to add him to his staple of clients.  Either that, or he feels he can lure in a big contract (like his buddy, Kevin Martin) by signing Garcia.  Goodwin also represents another King - Shareef Abdul-Rahim, and a former Kings franchise player - Chris Webber.  To say that Aaron Goodwin has some weight with Kings' owners the Maloof brothers is unquestionable.  So did Goodwin help get Theus the coaching gig so to get Garcia onboard?

The Kings will be an interesting team to keep an eye on this year.  They recently signed Mikki Moore (not related to anyone mentioned in this post), and have some fascinating team dynamics at play.

Very very big tip of the hat to The Marathon Man for pretty much bringing this post together.

Stephon is currently touring the country promoting his Starbury line of sneakers, which has no marketing budget, so this is kinda critical.  I can't believe I missed his appearance at Columbus Circle last Friday - I was right there, too.  Someone needs to tip me off to these kinds of things.  There are some great stories about the people he's met so far, and how much the sneakers have meant to them, but this one right here sums up the appeal of the $15 kicks to me:

Then there was a very charismatic lady named Sylvia who drove 45 minutes with five kids from just outside of Delaware to say thank you. As she said to me, it's not easy providing for a family of five and Starbury helps make her burden lighter. When I say it's bigger than basketball, that's what I'm talking about. 

As someone who grew up in a very poor household, I can appreciate the difference it makes when you can buy $15 sneakers that are still high quality, as oppose to paying $100.  That is why I've been so supportive of Marbury's philanthropy. 

He doesn't talk about basketball much, and even when he ways in on Kevin Durant, it's still about the shoe biz and making a difference:

In the last few weeks, I had a lot of discussions with Kevin Duran t's people to see if he would join the Starbury flagship.
I never spoke to him directly, only the people who control what he's doing. I told his agent Aaron Goodwin about the formula and new business model we've developed for the sneaker industry.
They seemed interested but decided to go in another direction. I hear that Nike is coming out with a Kevin Durant shoe for $50 or $60. I guess we're doing something right. I have love for the young kid and want him to do well.

You can definitely see where his mind is at right now.  As a Knick fan, I kinda wonder if this is going to distract him from focusing on his game, but how can you knock someone who is trying to make a real difference!   This is really bigger than basketball.  We are disappointed that he picked the Post, though... we would rather be redirecting people to the far superior Newsday section.  In fact, here's a link to Alan Hahn's latest post, in which he tries to define Renaldo Balkman's exciting playing style and potential (in the end he decides that Balkman has the potential to be a cross between Dennis Rodman and Ron Artest, without the craziness but with more weed), offers an evaluation of Wilson Chandler so far, gives his take on the Mo Williams deal (personally, I think Mo Williams is fine to take the offer from Milwaukee - they have a playoff team with Redd, Bogut, and either Yi or whatever they get for Yi, plus Mo himself; in addition, I wouldn't pass on $18 million, not on my first major contract... maybe if it was my second contract and I was already set, but he's still too early in his career to be leaving money on the table), and talks about Mikki Moore.  It's a good read.

Finally, I'll just chime in for my Nets fans, and say that I think the Jamaal Magliore signing might turn out to be a steal.  I don't think he'll regain his All-Star form again, but he doesn't have to.  With Kidd, Carter, Jefferson and Kristic, all he has to do is play decent defense (which he can), and showcase a few post moves (which he still has).  With Kidd leading the charge, Magliore might become a very serviceable big man.  We really are getting excited about the Atlantic Division this upcoming season - between the solidly recharged Nets, the young running Raptors, the potential of the Knicks, and the revamped Celtics and young 76ers, the Atlantic division is much improved.  It'll be interesting to see how things shape up next season.  

Editor's Note:  The wonderful art is once again taken from the Marcoart website... check it out. 

He played AAU ball with Greg Oden and Mike Conley Jr. and was the DJ for Greg Oden's draft party in New York.   He also makes a monthly mix tape for Stephon Marbury to listen to has he drives to practice.

The Daily News' internet link for the article has two of the three pictures that were in the paper version of the article; one is missing.  I had to scan it to add it below:

Damnit!  Come on, Zeke... this is getting f*cking embarrassing, man.  What is with the popcorn all the time, man?  I get it, you got a little business on the side, but come on.  On TV, during the summer league games, in the stands with the coaching staff... eating the popcorn.  At home, with the kids... eating the popcorn.  Getting interviewed about the Randolph trade... eating the popcorn. Two words, yo: re-hab.

"Hi, my name is Zeke, and I am a popcorn addict."

I know what you are thinking, and I won't do it... you saw the title of this post, right?  Nothing in their about "special New Edition remix", right?  I'm not going to do it, okay?  It's too easy.  

F*ck it.  Here we go:

They say it’s popcorn love
But it’s more than that to me
Popcorn love
Just wait, they will see

It’s popcorn love
Every morning, noon and night
Popcorn love

Don’t you know, don’t you know
It’s the real thing.

When we go on those special dates
We’re always holding hands
We’re never, ever late
You’re on my mind all the time

I keep thinking (I keep thinking)
Thinking (I keep thinking)
I keep thinking (Thinking of you)

Popcorn love

But it’s more than that to me
Popcorn love
Just wait, they will see

Popcorn love
Every morning, noon and night
Popcorn love

Don’t you know, don’t you know
It’s the real thing. 

There.  I didn't even have to change a freaking word.  Sigh.  I can't even finish this post... DJM or Barnes, you guys take over....

Editor's Note: The art above was taken from the Marcoart website - check it out! ]]>