The Day the Series Died

Wonderful. A perfectly good series that had just been rescued from the brink of controversy to vault into instant classic territory, ruined by David Stern doing his best Bud Selig impersonation.

Fans everywhere were concerned after game four that the results of Cheap Shot Rob's (yes, I'll happily jump on THAT bandwagon) unsportsmanlike, unprofessional, immature hit on Steve Nash would ruin this series. We pondered an impossible amount of scenarios that would work out best for the teams, the next game, the series, and the playoffs as a whole. It was a given that Horry would be suspended, but the fates of Boris Diaw and Amare Stoudemire were in question.

Diaw, who has been a disappointment all season long due to his lack of intensity and desire on the court, takes two steps towards his fallen captain, and he loses a game and $35,000.

Stoudemire, still a big kid in a man's game, follows his gut reaction in a hotly contested, highly physical (more so as the series progresses) contest by jumping up to come to his point guard's defense, gets pulled aside by Marc Iavaroni before getting near the "altercation", and he, too, gets to sit out game five.

Why? Because David Stern and Stu Jackson are so wrapped up in the "integrity of the game" cloak that they can't see the bigger picture? Can these two businessmen, who have built a legacy for the league as a global marketing icon, REALLY have made one of the worst business decisions in league history?

Although not nearly in the same ballpark, this decision goes right to the top of the list as one of professional sports' biggest "What the Fuck?!" moves, right underneath using the MLB All Star game to determine home field advantage in the World Series. It was dumb. It was ill-conceived. It had everything but the best interest of the game in mind, namely the best interest of the commissioner.

This is a commissioner who has been roundly criticized for taking authoritarian rule to Mussolini levels.

During an altercation, all players not participating in the game must remain in the immediate vicinity of their bench. Violators will be suspended, without pay, for a minimum of one game and fined up to $35,000. The suspensions will commence prior to the start of their next game.

NBA rule section VII-c under "Fines" states the punishment clearly, that players who leave "the immediate vicinity of their bench" during an "altercation" will be suspended and fined. David Stern's interpretation leaves out "immediate vicinity", and he has taken it upon himself to declare that the rule states that, during an altercation, no player may leave the bench (PERIOD).

This is the same guy who has denied owner requests to expand the league to Las Vegas, a HUGE marketing and sales bonanza, because he is afraid gambling on NBA games will somehow affect the league. Last I checked, people are already gambling on games, no evidence of fixes or shady dealings have surfaced, and everyone involved seems to be doing quite well.

This is also the same person who made a backroom deal with Spalding to release a new line of synthetic basketballs ($100 a pop) to the public without giving players a say in the decision, and without giving them time to adjust. When the complaints from several future Hall of Fame players, including reigning MVP Steve Nash, he made another bone headed, one-sided decision to change back to the leather ball midseason, with only one day for teams to adjust.

Stern is so bent on his own megalomaniacal vision of the entire league, he refuses to exercise any semblance of common sense and human decency because it might make him look like a hypocrite. God forbid that someone thinks that you've done a terrible job and should be fired, Mr. Commissioner. General managers, coaches, and players live with that criticism every day, so what makes David Stern think that he should be held to a different standard than the people who are actually responsible for bringing the product to the consumers?

He's a business person, not a judge. His nature precludes him from making socially beneficial decisions, instead guiding him along the path of self-preservation. He is quickly becoming the George W. Bush of professional sports in America.

Just like the Bushes, David Stern has clearly never been in a fight in his life (though we don't know if Stern's family sold steel illegally to the Nazis). He has never seen his friends or family attacked in a vicious and brutish manner. And it seems likely that he has never fallen victim to his own overloaded emotions (if he has any). If he had, then we would see a lot more discretion in his handling of penalties.

He decided that the officials would rule any display of emotion after a tough call as an automatic technical foul, which only served to suck the life out of the game early in the season.

He decided that Carmelo Anthony was the worst violator in the MSG fight in December, even though it was Nate Robinson and Jared Jeffries piling on the Street Fighter routine by chasing down players and getting into everyone's face, doing their best to continue the action.

He decided that Kobe Bryant's "inadvertent" elbowing of Manu Ginobili was an act worthy of a one game suspension without previous warning.

And now he decides that two players, who have done nothing more than jump to the aid of their comrade without getting involved or heading into the fray, should be removed from the biggest game of any playoff series - game five, tied at two wins apiece. (I believe the statistic is that around 74% of teams who win game five in this situation go on to win the series, although the number could be as low as the 60s.)

What a brilliant marketing maneuver. During a time when the league's ratings are lower than the cut on a French bikini, Stern has the egomaniacal audacity to follow his own gutless precedent by potentially ruining the best playoff match up since Magic Johnson's Lakers met Michael Jordan's Bulls in the 1991 Finals.

Fans don't remember the marketing. They don't care about the global influence of the NBA. And the only people who care about NBA Cares are the ad execs in the league's New York business offices.

Fans remember great play, great series, and great championship runs. They also remember the worst decisions in NBA history (Sam Bowie, anyone?).

The only salvation possible for this entire mess is if the Suns can overcome Stern's ineptness at managing the league. If they do that, then no one will care about game five of the 2007 Western Conference Semifinals.

If the Suns don't win it all (especially if they lose this series), what do you think fans will remember most about the 2007 NBA season?

Not a damn thing, and we're right back to 1999.