Everybody's Favorite Game Show!

I call it "What The Hell Are You Thinking?". It's pretty self-explanatory.

Contestant number one is Stu Jackson, the NBA executive in charge of handing out suspensions and a super mega butthole. Let's review the suspensions that have been handed out recently and try to find a pattern, shall we?
1. Robert Horry hip checks Steve Nash into the scorer's table: 2 games.
2. Rajon Rondo throws Kirk Hinrich into the scorer's table: No suspension.
3. Rafer Alston gives Eddie House a what-the-fuck-was-that head smack: 1 game.
4. Rajon Rondo takes a running swipe at Brad Miller's face, giving him several stiches: Not even a flagrant.
5. Dwight Howard throws a a malicious elbow above Samuel Dalembert's shoulders: 1 game as defined by the NBA rulebook.
6. Kendrick Perkins throws a malicious elbow above Mickael Pietrus's shoulder's: 0 games, despite this situation being outlined as an automatic suspension in the rule book and the precedent set by Dwight Howard.
Do you see the pattern? Hint: it's that small market teams get suspensions while big market teams don't. But that's not even the best part. It gets better if you take a look at Stu Jackson's actual quotes:
"It's clear in our rules that we treat elbow contact above the shoulder area differently than we do for other parts of the body."
False. Not true. You are lying. What's clear in the rules is that you should treat elbow contact above the shoulder area differently than for other parts of the body. What's clear by your refusal to suspend Kendrick Perkins when he elbowed my Mickael Pietrus in the neck, and according to this chart the neck is above the shoulder, is that you don't give a flying fuck about the rules.
"We didn't think much about this penalty [Alston's suspension] because the rule here is clear -- any player who swings his hand, whether with an open or closed fist and whether or not that hand connects -- we suspend them for one game."
See example 4 for why this statement is actually satire.

Contestant Number 2: The Incredible Kruk. For his over the top, self-righteous rant against Manny Ramirez. To paraphrase, John explains that all the other Dodgers followed Manny around like puppy dogs, that he gave them all advice on hitting and baseball, and that by taking performance enhancing drugs Manny placed himself above the team. He also questions why anyone would want him on their team. Dear Mr. Kruk, how is taking performance enhancing drugs putting yourself above the team? Is it because they make you perform better, thus improving the team's chances of winning? Is it because the illegal edge PEDs gave Manny last year rocketed the Dodgers into the playoffs?* Is it because PEDs turn a guy into a complete asshole, someone who would not go around giving advice to young hitters on how to improve themselves? You know, the kind of advice that comes from one of the best hitters of his generation, that's still valid even though he was taking PEDs?

Let's be honest about this era of baseball. It is reasonable to assume that every great hitter from this generation was taking some form of PED. It was too easy to cheat and not get caught, and there were too many guys cheating for most good players to stay clean. I won't get into the debate about whether or not Manny should make the Hall, because I don't know how I feel about it. But this is not an example of Manny placing himself above the team. Manny placed himself above the team when he quit on the Red Sox. Manny placed himself above the team when he held out for a preposterous contract nobody could afford during the worst economic crisis in 30 years. Manny is a douche. It's that simple. But he is also a hell of a baseball player and seems to be a good teammate in LA. It's OK to hate him, to rail against him, to say he embarrassed the game. But don't be a fucking pawn who freaks out whenever PEDs are brought up in an attempt to re-sanctify the game. If baseball ever does regain the image it once had, it sure as hell won't be because of the misplaced indignation of the "writers" who cover it.

Contestant Number 3: Mark Wunderlich and Magic Johnson competing as a tag team. Wunderlich is the official who didn't call the intentional foul while time wound down in the Mavericks-Nuggets game. He was so incredibly incompetent that the NBA actually admitted a mistake. Let me restate that for emphasis. This man was so unbelievably fucking incompetent that the NBA, which as protocol never admits error, had to admit that its terrible officiating did in fact effect the outcome of a game. Mark Cuban hasn't come out with his reaction yet because his head actually exploded. Marky Mark was also involved in the Portland-Houston playoff game where the Houston crowd started chanting "These refs suck!". For the record, I read some of Mark Wunderlich's bio and he seems like a genuinely good guy. He just happens to be a terrible official and I believe the NBA really needs to be called out about all the piss poor officiating that occurs in the league.

Helping him find his way to the podium will be Magic Johnson, who actually believes that it's the Mavericks fault a foul wasn't called because they didn't tell the refs they were trying to intentional foul. I would like to explain to Magic that it's called an intentional foul because it is obvious to everyone in the building that you are fouling the guy on purpose, hoping to make the ref blow the whistle. If a situation is obvious to everyone in the building but the official, then there's something wrong with the official not everybody else. Part of the reason we have such shitty officiating is that people like Magic Johnson make an excuse for them every time they make an egregious error. If their job is so damn hard, then put a fourth man on the crew. Or bump their pay and make the field more attractive to potential competitors. Competition improves quality. That's a little economics lesson for the NBA front office, because they seem to care far more about making a buck than the quality and integrity of the league.

Only Because No One Else Is Saying It

Like the title says, the only reason I bring this up is because it needs to be mentioned and neither ESPN nor foxsports nor NBA.com have any sort of journalistic integrity. Rajon Rondo should be suspended for game 7 of the Bulls-Celtics series. You will not even find a hint of debate on any of these sites over this subject, like it never happened. Attempting to throw a player into the stands is grade F, horseshit, Horry got two games for a similar deal. Rondo then throwing an elbow at the player's head, and yahoo! sports also caught this little move, is grade F horseshit. Amare Stoudemire was suspended for leaving the bench area. I demand to know how Stu Jackson will justify, and he will somehow justify it, not suspending Rajon when the rules and precedent are so clear.

Ratings are important, this has been a great series. But I have news for people: Nothing will top Game 6. Game 7 will most likely be a letdown. To say "Well the fans want to see a great game!" as an argument for why a player should not be suspended is insulting to every real fan who has ever watched the game of basketball. The whole "You don't call THAT in the final minutes of a game" argument, the "You don't let a star foul out with THAT" argument, and the "You can't suspend him NOW" arguments need revision. The players should be allowed to play in the final minutes of a game, they know they aren't getting a call on the final drive. But here's the thing. THE DEFENSE KNOWS THAT TOO. So the Celtics have turned this gentleman's agreement into a carté-blanche to take whatever cheap shots are necessary to stop the ball. If John Salmons drives the lane in the final minutes f a game, Paul Pierce pushes him from behind and slaps at the ball, Rondo runs in from the side and slaps him on the arms, and Kendrick Perkins puts a forearm in his face. One of those 3 should be called a foul.

I should mention that I credit the Celtics for taking advantage of the incompetence of the refs, they know it helps them win. I think it's absolutely pathetic that the officials have become so predictably terrible that a team can turn them into strategy. More anecdotal evidence: with 5 fouls in overtime last night, Paul Pierce committed between 3-6 more fouls before eventually picking up his 6th. He would fly in over the backs of guys and actually took Joakim Noah down on one particular rebound because he knew he wasn't fouling out on an over-the-back call. He would push and shove John Salmons every time he dribbled because he knew he wasn't fouling out with a blocking foul. He threw an elbow at Kirk Hinrich when Hinrich matched up tight with him because he knew he wasn't fouling out with an offensive foul. How many lame and cheap to decent fouls up add up to one good one? It's almost an advantage for a Celtics star to be playing with 5 fouls.

As for the argument that nobody wants to see Rajon suspended now, for Game 7, I only have one sentence. IF HE WANTS TO PLAY, THEN HE SHOULDN'T HAVE FUCKING THROWN A GUY INTO A SCORER'S TABLE THEN PITCHED AN ELBOW AT HIM BECAUSE THAT WARRANTS A SUSPENSION EVERY FUCKING TIME!

I'm sorry if you believe this is all I took away from the greatest basketball game ever. It's really not, I absolutely loved it. I even had a Boston fan respectfully congratulate me on the game, which meant that this one really was special. But I do have reasons why I run this blog, and one of the biggest is that I hate the media's impact on sports. Another big reason is that I hate to see league's sell some of the integrity of the game (And the NBA has sold a lot of integrity right now. Rondo could basically go up to David Stern and say "Fuck you, you don't have the balls to suspend me for this game no matter what I do," and David Stern would smile, nod, and then go back to counting his wad of money) for the sake of money. And the third is that I think I'm super-awesome and important and everybody should know what I think about things.