Stern should fine himself for conduct that is detrimental to the production of our team, which is apart of the NBA. Just when you think this Drama is going to go away, Sterno discriminates against a Euro
I don't even know what you're talking about. I listed players quoted, making trade demands, who were not fined. That is a fact. For some reason, Rudy has been fined a total of $75k for making similar comments. If you don't see that as subjective punishment, that's a you problem, "dude". You pretty much proved my point, "dude". I never said anything about Rule 35 being solely about players making trade demands, so I'm honestly baffled about what the fuck your message is here. My point is that some players have been fined for violating Rule 35, while others have not.
Your point keeps changing. Your FIRST point was that Stern is just getting shots in at Portland by fining Rudy. I'm replying, though, to your statement that "what Rudy said about the 'NBA' means ZERO." Talking about being traded is all that matters." You're incorrect with that statement. Players can be fined for a variety of reasons, based on what damage Stern sees as being done to the health of the NBA. That some players have not been fined for stating some things or that some players have been fined for stating others does not matter too much to whether a player putting down the entire league might--in the estimation of the one person who matters--be more worthy of a fine. Your assertion that Stern is out to get the Blazers by fining Rudy is paranoid and ridiculous, but your assertion that Stern CANNOT fine Rudy for statements about the NBA in general is almost as weird. Is your point that Stern makes subjective decisions? Really? Maybe I should make a point that the NBA has more than one team in it? Or that the basketball is basically a sphere? Ed O.
Yes. I thought it was clear. Nobody else seems puzzled by it. Subjective decisions that are not applied equally, in this instance. Are you going to whiff again on my position, only to try and mock me for what I stated was merely a personal opinion? You answered incorrectly in this thread, I corrected it with the actual NBA Rule that allows the fines, and now you seem to be butthurt about being wrong. Sorry, "Dude". I didn't mean to make you angry.
what the fuck is your deal? Every thread on this board seems to either get trashed by Mixum, and then those complaining to and about Mixum, or by you, going on some personal vendetta and starting a long string of bullshit like this. This place is starting to go downhill fast. You're right. Stern is trying to hold us down. It's a conspiracy.
"Long string of bullshit" = factual and sourced links to the rule that cost Rudy $75k and other players ZERO. Prove what I posted as being incorrect, or sit on the sidelines and whine about posting style.
My head just expanded to fill the universe and then contracted so quickly that there's no evidence of it. Prove me wrong. David Stern fined Rudy to cause dissension on the Blazers team. Prove me wrong. Ed O.
why does this bother you so much? To me its clear as day, Rudy's agent at first said he wants a trade. Then his agent says he doesn't even want to play in the NBA. Essentially bashing the NBA. He gets fined a good amount, because he bad-mouthed the NBA. Those other players who didn't get fined didn't say they would sit out if they had to play in the NBA. End of story. Not really sure what I'm missing. Then again, I don't really care. Rudy made this mess, now he's got to pay for it.
BGrant retracted his talk about Stern having something against the Blazers, everytime he answered "hyperbole." He reduced his argument to what everyone can agree to--that Stern has been inconsistent in fines against players publicly wanting trades, and that Rudy probably got this fine because he's not a big star. I agree with that. I just listened to the radio show. The Spanish agent speaks awful English and resorted to a humanist argument for why Rudy should be allowed to quit. The American agent should be talking, and putting some muscle into the reasoning, threatening a court fight. First, they should ask the union for help. If the union won't help, they should take it to court. Stop pleading and develop a strategy based upon strength.
While I generally agree, and state for the record that I'm not an expert in law--union or otherwise--isn't it kind of a frivolous lawsuit if both management and the union representing you won't take your side?
While I'm not trying to jump into the legal pieces and whether they CAN fine players for simply asking to be traded. But I did hear one argument that made a lot of sense (considering they are still a business and can have some discretion as to when and how heavily they implement their own penalties). But the argument was referencing the fact that Rudy was wanting OUT of the NBA vs. just wanting to go to another team. It implies that instead of a player simply being unhappy with his dept and wanting to laterally transfer to another group, he is now saying this is a bad company to work for and I don't want to go to any other dept, but instead I want to go to another "inferior" company making the same product. Big difference from a CEO's point-of-view. If I'm considered the premier company in my field (say Roll Royce) and one of my lead engineers is saying he wants out of Rolls Royce and wants to go over to Volkswagon or Ford, that is really a black eye on the company. If I have a policy that says my hiring you to the premier company could lead to fines if you say something that might look bad for the company, then it makes sense to enforce it seriously if someone is implying that they want to go to an inferior company to get away from your product. Much more so than if the engineer had simply said he wanted out of the engine dept and a career change over into the body design dept.
Stern fined Stephen Jackson $25k for wanting to be traded to another team, and not out of the NBA. How is that fine explained in the above scenario?
One guy went to prison for rape and another went to prison for rape and murder. The former doesn't explain the latter, and that failure of explanation doesn't mean that both didn't deserve it. Ed O.
