The Donaghy scandal grows.

1) The league could have conducted a real investigation before Stern swore to everybody that Donaghy was a lone wolf. Clearly they didn't do that, because a simple check of his cell phone records turned up the probability that another ref was involved, and other refs have said that no one from the NBA or law enforcement has ever contacted them in regards to Donaghy.

2) If there were at least 2 refs out there fixing games, it's not inaccurate to say the NBA is fixed.

3) Think about this worst-case scenario: The refs conspired to affect the outcomes of games like the Kings-Lakers in the playoffs, with the approval of league execs, as Donaghy has alleged. Stern told us that the NBA had confirmed that this was Donaghy acting alone when the league really hadn't conducted much of an investigation to determine if that was true. If that's the case, then, yeah, Stern is pretty corrupt.

 

Why is it that the Knicks have actually moved down in the lottery every year they've been in it save for the Patrick Ewing draft?

Why would Price Waterhouse put its rep on the line in overseeing a lottery procedure just to help a sports franchise?

How many accusations have been made about the NBA trying to extend a series? The Western Conference Finals, in 2002. Any others? I can't think of any. Your "10 years" thing rings hollow.

 

1) I'm talking about before the scandal broke. There is only so much that you can do to investigate an employee without breaking any laws and there has been nothing to indicate that there is anything which they could have done to figure this out.

2) If there were two refs. This latest piece of news is interesting, but there is nothing which indicates that the league itself is involved even if both of them were betting.

3) I'm not understanding. If the league told them to have the Kings lose -- obviously that is corrupt. If their internal investigation was deficient, that sure as heck isn't the same thing. An admitted felon issues what is basically a press release during the NBA playoffs to try to make the league look bad. There has been nothing to corroborate any of his allegations.

People here are still bringing up the Ewing lottery with no proof or the non-call on MJ as evidence that the league is corrupt or fixed. Heck, Mizzou said that Stern is "the most corrupt commissioner in the history of sport" and hasn't cited anything to back that up. Ridiculous.

 

#3 sounds nice, broadway, until anyone who knows something about this league tells you that the NBA and the refs union have been at loggerheads for years. They can't stand each other, going back to the implementation of the 3-man system, through the tax dodging, the 1995 ref lockout, etc.

All of the sudden these guys are doing Stern's bidding? Come on.

And, of course, even though it's been posted, nobody wants to read this:

http://www.82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm

 

There's truth to what you're saying Slim, but anyone who knows something about this league would also tell you that there are some long-time refs who are, as Donaghy termed it, "company men" who aren't at odds with Stern at all.

Webster, if two refs are fixing games -- hell, even if one ref is fixing games -- the NBA in effect is fixed. It doesn't need to be a widespread conspiracy. One ref fixing games can cause a ripple effect that changes standings, playoff series, etc.

 

I just fear the "company men" tag has gotten to Uncle Tom proportions, something to be spat out at any ref that dares to have anything more than a passing word with players in the midst of the game. Since the late 1980s, with the Strom acolytes moving on, the referees have been encouraged to have next to no on-court chatter with players.

Bavetta never subscribed to that. Whether that makes him a company man, well, it depends on who's doing the painting.

I do know he called a miserable Game 6 in 2002, just as the refs in that Game 5 called a miserable game that went in Sacramento's favor. And I don't see any planning or malice behind it. I encourage anyone who wants to offer anything more nuanced than Mizzou's end-all absolutes to read the 82games piece.

 

How has he punished teams in the past? You bring this up as a fact, so let's hear a bit about it.

If he wants the Celtics, Bulls, and Knicks in the Finals every year, why

1). Didn't he give the Celtics cap relief when Reggie Lewis died? If he wanted Boston to be in the Finals, or even better, why didn't he go against the Collective Bargaining Agreement and make it happen?

2). Why didn't he do more to ensure that the Celtics (who had the best of any chances at the first, and third picks) got the picks they were mathematically supposed to get in the 1997 lottery? Instead, the first pick dropped to the third (the lowest it could have gone), and the third pick fell to the sixth.

3). Why didn't Stern help the Bulls when they had the same set of mathematical chances in the 2000 lottery? They had the best chance at the second and fourth picks, and instead their choices fell to the fourth and seventh spots.

4). Why didn't he move the Knicks up in the lottery in 2002?

5). 2003?

6). 2005?

7). Why didn't he give the Bulls (working with New York's pick) the top pick in 2006?

8). Why did the Knicks fall to the sixth pick in 2008?

Where's the proof, or at the very least hints, behind these allegations?

Just on the Finals alone, as high as a well-regarded WCF can be, it pales in comparison to Finals ratings. So why haven't their been extensions in the Finals over the last decade? From the 82games piece:

Face it, the NBA just wants the big time playoff matchups to go the distance
Really? If so they do a lousy job of manipulating results! In the past ten seasons only one NBA final has gone seven games, and only four out of twenty conference finals have gone the distance. In other words, out of thirty key best of seven series, only five have maxed out the games. In contrast, eleven of those series didn't even reach a game six!

All of Mizzou's stuff sounds like a hardass who knows what he's talking about, but he's proven time and time again that he has no clue.

 

Stern might be looking for an exit strategy about now. Hiring a guy from the Army Corps of Engineers (see Hurricane Katrina) to oversee officials might have been more apt than we know.

 

According to some former NBA officials and others, you're wrong.

http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/video/videopage?videoId=3484915&categoryId=2459788&n8pe6c=2

If it doesn't load the first time, try again from the list at the right. If it doesn't load from there, let me know and I'll find a way to post it.

 

Thanks for checking in, Commissioner Stern.

 

we did go to the same school and if you ignore 5 or 6 zeros, have donated the same amount of cash.

 

The company line told them to take cheap shots at Donaghy and call him a desperate man who's trying to cut his sentence by squealing to the feds. Namely, ESPN doesn't want to be in Stern's doghouse like Sean Farnham did a month ago during a radio interview with Stern on FSR.

Stern loves to punish networks as well if they question his integrity.

#1: why would Donaghy lie to the feds? Bonds and Marion Jones found out you don't fuck with them; and
#2: Stern and his minions are doing their damnest to deny that there is more pig shit in the barn.

Rogue referee, my fucking ass. This is why every NBA fan thinks the league is crooked.

Donaghy knows he's going to jail and he may not care about getting a sentence reduction. So why not tell the feds of everything he's done.