Memo to the Nuggets: George Karl didn't fight off cancer for this bullshit.

The Dallas Mavericks: Boy, these cats sure miss Dirk Nowtizki, don't they? The Mavericks started the game on fire, hitting eight of their first 10 shots and scoring 30 points in the first quarter. Their offense kinda slogged off after that, especially during their 15-point third quarter. Add that to the fact that they couldn't contain Kevin Durant (28 points on 11-for-22 shooting).

Said Mavs coach Rick Carlisle: "We struggled defensively in the second half, we struggled on the boards, and [the Thunder's] second-chance points were our undoing down the stretch."

That's four losses in Dirk's six missed games. Next up: The Orlando Magic.

More bad news: The Mavs are 35 games into their season but have played only 14 road games. This means their schedule is backloaded with road games, which could put a pretty big damper on any hopes of beating out the Spurs or Lakers in the race for homecourt advantage in the playoffs.

The Denver Nuggets: The Purple Paupers enter last night's game with a league-worst record of 7-25. What's more, they were the only team in the Association that was winless against winning teams.

Well, now they have a victory over a winning team and the Cavaliers (8-27) are stuck with the NBA's worst record. All thanks to the Enver Nuggets.

How soft were the Nuggets on defense last night? Let me put it this way: If I'm ever forced to jump out of a helicoptor while firing my machine gun at an oncoming horde of the undead during the inevitable zombie apocalypse, I hope I land on Enver's D. Either that or Pau Gasol. Okay, or maybe Scarlett Johansson.

Anyway, let's get you the numbers. The Kings finished with 122 points on 56 percent shooting. Furthermore, they shot 50 percente from downtown (9-for-18) and 83 percent on the foul line (25-for-30). According to the Basketball-Reference box score, their Effective Field Goal Percentage was 62.2 and they had an Offensive Rating of 126.8.

More numbers: The Kings had 27 fast break points and scored 27 points off 23 forced turnovers. Tyreke Evans went berzerk (29 points and a season-high 12 assists) and the Sactowners went on a 23-2 run in the second half on their way to a 20-point win that probably had Carmelo Anthony doing a Google search for houses in New York after the game.

Remember: In their last game, the Nuggets suffered a double-digit loss to the Clippers.

Said 'Melo: "We're just frustrated right now. I know I am after these two losses against two teams that we should have beat. Tonight was an embarrassing loss; that's all I have to say about it."

Added Denver coach George Karl: "I'm kind of blown away with our performance. My team, since I've been in Denver, has often bounced back from tough losses. But tonight we did not do it. Sometimes we need to think about playing harder. When you have 12 assists, 23 turnovers, no steals, that tells you you are not active enough."

How bad was this loss? Here's how bad: Jeffrey Morton of Denver Stiffs sounds like he needs to be talked out of drinking paint thinner:

I've never been so disappointed with this Nuggets team. I'm done with the hyperbole and the words. You all saw what happened. There's no reason for losing like this, and the lack of explanation is what hurts the most. The Nuggets looked lifeless for three quarters. For nearly one quarter they played on fire. The only thing I can think of is maybe the Carmelo situation is getting to them? Maybe not. Honestly I don't care anymore.

Melo didn't play badly. Nene was one of the few bright spots...but the rest of the team played like they wanted to be anywhere but Sacramento this evening. That's not what a professional sports team does.

It's not about having "hope". It's knowing what your team is. It's knowing what your team can accomplish. That's what makes this even more disheartening. My only hope is that the Nuggets can right this ship before it takes we as Nuggets fans down with it.
Damn. Imagine how bummed out he's going to be when 'Melo leaves.

At any rate, the Nuggets officially qualifty for a little Michael Ray Richardson quotage:

Reporter: What do you think is happening to the team?

Richardson: The ship be sinking.

Reporter: How far can it sink?

Richardson: Sky's the limit.
The Cleveland Cavaliers: As noted, now the league's worst team.

Donald Sterling: Newsflash: Sterling is a shitty owner and a racist. This news just blew my socks off. Seriously. No matter what MythBusters tells you.

Amar''''''e Stoudemire, quote machine: Not that Suns fans need any more reasons to be depressed, but, well, here you go:

Stoudemire's wish was to stay in Phoenix but left over a chasm in guaranteed money. He took a maximum-level, five-year $99.7 million contract that is fully guaranteed over the Suns' five-year, $96.6 million offer with about $56 million guaranteed. The remainder of the Suns' deal would have kicked in if he played a comparably low minute total in his third and fourth years.

The stipulation addressed the Suns' concerns about Stoudemire's knees and right eye, all of which have had surgeries.

"If they were looking to rebuild and thought I was the guy they wanted to rebuild with, then we could've came to an understanding," Stoudemire said. "But apparently it wasn't that way. It felt like I wasn't wanted. It felt like I wasn't appreciated. I felt like my play on the court was overlooked.

"If you have the best training staff and brag about the situation, my knees really weren't much of a concern. It was something that didn't make him (Managing Partner Robert Sarver) comfortable and he made a decision. I don't want to get involved in an amount-of-minutes situation because it becomes a control issue. You want to be able to play free."

Suns coach Alvin Gentry said Stoudemire was concerned that the Suns were going to remain mostly Steve Nash's team. Home fans chanted "M-V-P" for both players.

"I think he felt like he would like to have a team that was his, that he was the focal point, that it would be basically his team," Gentry said.

Nash said he "foolishly" thought the Suns would re-sign Stoudemire, 28.

"We lost an All-Star power forward and we didn't replace him," Nash said. "We have no real kind of power forward."

Stoudemire said it is hard for him to see Suns fans endure their worst team in seven years.

"We were in the conference finals and had a chance to do something special this season but all of a sudden it went in the opposite direction," Stoudemire said. "It's tough to see because the fans deserve more. They've been loyal. We've been on top so long that they deserve a championship team. But decisions were made and they're going in another direction.

"Last year, the Knicks wanted to be in the Suns' shoes. This year, we're, we're...yeah."

He received little fan disdain for his exit, which could bode well for his reception Friday.

"I don't know how I'll be received," he said. "(Suns analyst) Tom Chambers and Gambo and Ash (KTAR-AM hosts John Gambadoro and Mark Asher) did a great job of talking bad about me while I was there so hopefully that blows over and the fans will appreciate me a little bit more."
Bonus video: Basketbawful reader kazam92 left this link with the comment "Charles Barkley is the fuckin man." Indeed he is.

Chris's One-Line Lacktion Ledger: In exactly 120 seconds, Donte Greene tossed one celebratory brick for a +1 suck differential.

Labels: , , ,

Blogger Murcy said...
I can already see we're gonna have us some nice Anaconda HL ranting about the quote. and I still can't scroll down the page, it's horrific, having to look at vujabitch being happy.

some time ago in the comments, there was some discussion about the best internation player to play in the NBA. just a question, what do you guys think about drazen petrovic? shame he died so early.

wv: upercla. FINNALLY. someone has destroyed half of the upper classes

Anonymous The Other Chris said...
Charles Barkley ftw.

Blogger Lord Kerrance said...
Charles Barkley is basketball's Don Cherry.

Blogger Will said...
Hey chris, were you checking your totem last night?

Blogger Dan B. said...
Love the George Karl pic and caption.

Via The Basketball Jones, Jason Terry Perfects 'Just Chillin' Defense.

Anonymous Marc d. said...
Let me preamble this comment with the assertion that I truly believe Tucker Carlson is a gigantic douchebag. And I love the Round Mound.

Why is it that as soon as a disgraced athlete starts doing well again everyone forgets all about their past transgressions? If Tiger Woods wins a major or two next year no one will be talking about the SUV incident anymore. I understand the whole idea of redemption and remorse and all that, but you HAVE to be a truly monstrous person to enjoy watching two dogs tear each other to shreds. So why is it suddenly okay to defend Michael Vick? He didn't deserve the death penalty, I suppose, but he certainly deserves a hell of a lot more than he got.

This rant is possibly unrelated to Barkley's comments last night, since I don't know if he was just attacking Tucker or if he was in fact defending Vick.

Blogger Dan B. said...
Marc d. -- The biggest issue I have with the whole Vick thing is that people want to treat him worse than people who rape or kill other human beings. Yeah, I love dogs and what he did is terrible, but why is it that so many people obsess over how evil Vick is, but let others off the hook? Hell, people treat OJ better and he fucking killed two people.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
It is absurd that George Karl gets a pass on this one. Whatever the problem with the team may be, it is exacerbated by Karl doing nothing to be a strong leader.
In his opinion this is the best Nuggets team he has ever coached. Looks like he is senile now too.

Blogger Dick Sullivan said...
I suppose my Mavs get effort points for trudging on with two out of five starters, but that shouldn't have anything to do with the fact that we don't have a point guard shooting above 40% right now. Yeah, when Abe-neck is a primary offensive weapon, you're in trouble. Starting to love that dude, though.

Dallas is demonstrably better on the road; I think scheduling is the least of their worries.

Blogger 49er16 said...
I was actually proud of the Paupers last night. They blew a 16-point lead in the third quarter and didn't panic.

Anonymous Stockton said...
You shouldn't mention Denver's defense too often in your posts.

Talking about imaginary entities is a clear sign of dementia...

(also valid for Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, VC's toughness, Lebron's humility and Casper the Ghost)

Anonymous Marc d. said...
Dan B,

People treat OJ better? Really? Seems to me he's been a complete outcast/laughing stock since the moment he stepped into that white Ford Bronco.

The funny thing is, imagine OJ came back to play football and actually succeeded at it. People would forget about that double-murder pretty quick, I think.

I just hate the way that athletic success is an instant cure-all for all past transgressions.

Blogger AnacondaHL said...
NBA Playbook helps further explain (via a video breakdown) just how much Vince Carter is indeed human shit.

Blogger Wormboy said...
"Suns coach Alvin Gentry said Stoudemire was concerned that the Suns were going to remain mostly Steve Nash's team."

Why Amar''''e will never win a ring (unless it's a career twilight ring like Payton's).

LOL @ Barkley. Dude is hilarious. I'm glad TNT lets him be himself, because it's a helluva lot more interesting than the sterile ESPN commentary.

Blogger Basketbawful said...
Why is it that as soon as a disgraced athlete starts doing well again everyone forgets all about their past transgressions? If Tiger Woods wins a major or two next year no one will be talking about the SUV incident anymore. I understand the whole idea of redemption and remorse and all that, but you HAVE to be a truly monstrous person to enjoy watching two dogs tear each other to shreds. So why is it suddenly okay to defend Michael Vick? He didn't deserve the death penalty, I suppose, but he certainly deserves a hell of a lot more than he got.

I have a few thoughts on this. I'm not defending what Vick did, which was terrible, but let's take a look at what he "got" for what he did. He lost his job. Lost his fortune. Lost his humanity in the eyes of an entire nation and large portions of the world at large. He spent almost two years in a federal prison. Even now, during his "redemption campaign," he's in a financial crisis and his bankruptcy judgement stipulates that most of his money is dispersed before it ever gets to him.

One of the great things about America is that people can actually get a second chance...after they are punished. Vick was prosecuted, convicted, served his sentence and is still paying out the ass. What more can he do?

You're wrong, by the way. The SUV incident will follow Woods forever, just as the dog fighting thing will follow Vick. These things might not receive constant mention in gold roundups or game recaps, but they will stay alive in the mind of people who follow sports. How many times, on this site alone, do people make reference to Kobe's rape trial? A rape for which, I should point out, Bryant was never convicted. But Bryant will always appear guilty in the eyes of the people who hate him.

The problem is, what many people want is for Vick to fail so utterly that all he'll be able to do is curl up and die somewhere, cold and alone, and possibly eaten by dogs. It's not going to happen. He hasn't been "given" a second chance. He served his time. He's still, literally, paying for his crimes. Which, according to America's legal system, means he's earned a second chance. He's making the most of it. What's wrong with that?

Anonymous JJ said...
Dan B,

I don't know if OJ is treated "better". I think it's more of people usually just ignoring him since he is now a pathetic has-been, whereas Vick is still active and thus actively talked about.

That being said, I do believe our country in general looks down more on animal cruelty than human cruelty. Maybe because human vs human is more of a fair fight? Maybe we have enough humans and not enough animals? Not really sure.

Blogger Nick said...
I'm pretty Darnell Jackson fired off that 3 at the buzzer just to stay off the laction report.

Anonymous Tree said...
@Marc d.: what Vick did was bad, no doubt, but I have one name for you in retort: Leonard Little.

If you're not familiar with him, look him up. He plays (played?) for the St. Louis Rams. He was caught drunk driving on multiple occassions, even killed a mother of young children in a crash (while drunk). Years after killing that woman, he got caught - you guessed it - drunk driving yet again. His suspension? 4 games. Moral outrage from the masses? Non-existant.

Unlike Vick, he did not do hard time (in one of the most notorious prisons in the US, btw), he did not lose out on the ability to play multiple seasons, he did not go bankrupt, he did not gain any type of reputation, and, seeing as though he was caught years later drunk-driving, he didn't learn his lesson either. But football fans ignore this, and zero in on a guy that was into dogfighting.

I think dog-fighting is reprehensible, don't get me wrong, but the puritans out there that think Vick should have lost more and not be given the second chance a murderer like Little got (and a third and fourth cahnce), boggle the mind. People seem to love dogs more than humans. Vick paid his debt. If he slips up again, he doesn't deserve another chance. Until then, get off your high-horse or apply your same line of thinking to other athletes that have committed much worse.

Innocent mother > dogs (at least, she should be).

Blogger chris said...
Nick: It still cracks me up that Darnell "Lacktion" Jackson was actually getting 5+ minute stints with this team earlier tihs season.

no, I take that back.

it's a sign of what is so wrong with the paupers. sigh

but I'll take a win on NATIONAL TELEVISION. who again thought these kings were good enough for anything other than Comcast Sports California coverage?!

Blogger Adam said...
I don't want to get too off-topic or anything but I think part of the hate for Vick is that as JJ suggested, there really is a notion of inequality between perpetrator and victim. Had Vick been abusing women and children, you can bet there'd be fewer people publicly defending him, saying he's "served his time". I personally get more offended when animals or children are abused than when adult humans are, mostly because they're less likely to understand why they're being treated the way they are and are less likely to be able to defend themselves.

On top of that, it's not like somebody filmed Vick kicking a puppy or something. It was a full blown dog fighting ring with lots of money involved and his excuse that it was part of his culture growing up comes up short in most people's estimations.

There are incidents in South Carolina of people chaining up defanged, declawed bears and setting dogs loose on them. That riles me up much more than human-on-human violence.

Anonymous Marc d. said...

I was just trying to bring up the correlation between celebrity success and popular forgiveness/forgetfulness. OJ still gets shat on because he's a train wreck. Imagine he turned his life around and became a hero again. Some would say he'd never be accepted but if he came back to lead a team to a superbowl you know there would be many who would idolize him (mostly fans of that team, of course).

Kobe is an interesting example. Yeah, people on this site still mention Kobe's rape trial, but that's mainly because this is a place to make fun of athletes who fuck up. When was the last time you heard the rape trial being mentioned in a broadcast or in popular media? I know it doesn't have anything to do with the game itself, and questions of his innocence notwithstanding, it's still an aspect of his character that should not be forgotten.

Hypothetical question: If you were a huge Eagles fan, how would you feel about your son putting a poster of Vick up on his wall? Would you do it yourself? Professional athletes are human and as Chuck has said many times should not be role models, but still people see them as such.

As a sidenote, sites like Basketbawful are key to breaking down the myth of the heroic professional athlete. When all is said and done it's just a game. Life matters, sports don't. No one should ever get any sort of pass just because they happen to be able to run real fast, jump real high, or throw a perfect spiral.

Anonymous Marc d. said...

Your absolutely right, the whole Leonard Little thing should have outraged people a lot more than what Vick did. But it didn't because he's not as famous as Vick. And that sucks.

Anonymous Mike Mai said...
hey bawful, have you seen this? http://www.tauntr.com/blog/introducing-brooklyn-new-yorkers

Blogger Dan B. said...
I don't know if OJ is treated "better". I think it's more of people usually just ignoring him since he is now a pathetic has-been, whereas Vick is still active and thus actively talked about.

Good call, that's more in line with what I was trying to say. OJ isn't treated "well," but people for the most part just ignore him at least.

Tree -- YES. Leonard Little is exactly the type of thing I'm talking about. Thank you.

Blogger BadDave said...
AHL - Awesome. That is THE perfect demonstration of Vag Carter.

Blogger Dan B. said...
AnacondaHL -- Finally got a chance to watch that Vince Carter video comparison. Ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. What a lazy motherfucker.

FYI guys, I will not be writing a BAD post tonight. Sorry for the short notice. Gotta get some stuff done today since this week hasn't gone as smoothly as I planned.

Anonymous Tree said...
@Adam - way off the topic of basketball today, but really?!?

You do realize that 'human-on-human' violence most often contains one human that is an innocent victim that doesn't understand why they're being treated in that way.

You reside in the group that boggles me: more concerned about bad things being done to animals than bad things being done to people. Adults or not, a victim is a victim. And sorry, a human victim gets my empathy 1000 times out of 1000.

And you have a point - most people would not so easily forgive a rapist or child molester ... because the victims are humans!

To get slightly personal here (in an attempt to highlight the ridiculousness of your post): my 27 year old brother was robbed at gunpoint by some thugs while walking home one night. He never met them before, put up no resistance and gave them everything he had, but they decided - once they had his belongings - that they'd gang beat him. 2 months of rehab and pissing blood later, he finally left the hospital with serious lifelong injuries (not to mention the mental anguish and constant fear he now lives in).

He was an innocent adult victim of 'human-on-human' violence. He also happens to look physically imposing at 6'8" and 250 pds (though he is not/was not ever a fighter). In your twisted rationale, an abused dog deserves more sympathy?!? Really?

Anonymous kazam92 said...
Glad I got this whole discussion going. Well let me say this, if the Eagles go all the way, it will be a nightmare for the NFL. Sad to say, they'd rather Vick lose early

I generally agree with the notion he paid his debt, did his time, has little money as is, etc.... the seething hate for him now is frankly overblown

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Marc d.
The main reason Kobe's trial is rarely mentioned by the media is because there's a decent-to-good chance he didn't do anything wrong other than cheat on his wife.

Remember the accuser only decided to back out of the trial and make a cash grab after evidence that favored Kobe started coming to light (the semen in her underwear, the fact that she bragged about sex with Kobe immediately afterwards and the slightly damaging fact that she had tried this exact same stunt before). While some of that may or may not have made it into a courtroom, it changed the national dialogue from "Kobe did it, I guarantee it" to "wow, maybe I should just see how this plays out".

And there's also the fact that the other guys were convicted in a court of law and/or admitted that they did everything (a la Tiger) and Kobe never was convicted or confessed. Given that this is still America that earns him a big benefit of the doubt.

Blogger Adam said...
Tree: Either you're confused about what I meant or I didn't explain myself well enough. I was just explaining what I personally tend to have more of a problem with and exploring the possibility that others feel the same. I wasn't making any sort of judgment as to which situation is actually worse, but I have a low enough opinion of humanity that I *do* tend to end up more upset about animal abuse.

One of the humans in human-on-human violence usually being innocent does suck, but I guess I'm just lacking in empathy or something. To answer your last ridiculous question: I never said the dog "deserves" more sympathy, just that I'd be more likely to sympathize with a random dog more than a random person. Again, just my opinion.

For the record, I also believe that Vick has done his time and shouldn't continue to be financially punished or whatever, but I can understand why so many people still hate him.

Anonymous Tree said...
@Adam - fair enough. I wrote that in your rationale ... so, it was correct given your last post.

However, the fact that you are more likley to have empathy for a random dog than a random human makes you part of the problem. If everyone cared more about other people, the world would be a better place. Instead, so many people take your misanthropic opinion that humanity is messed up (I agree) and therefore you don't care.

No matter how you want to sell it, having more concern for a random dog over a random person fits perfectly in the category of "examples of why humanity is so messed up".

Blogger David said...
My grandfather died a few months ago. He was in his mid-70s. My grandmother died of cancer in her mid '70s, and my best friend lost his dad to pancreatic cancer when he was in his 50s. All were good people.

Donald Sterling, however, is 77 years old and looks to be in good health. The world sucks sometimes.

Anonymous JJ said...
Anonymous, the real reason media doesn't mention Kobe is because it's not hot news to them anymore. It has nothing to do with whether he's guilty or not.

Example: as soon as they capped BP oil spill, media stopped talking about it, totally ignoring the fact that millions and millions of gallons of oil are still in the ocean killing who knows how many animals of all kinds. And we'll probably all end up eating the contaminated food and die. I just hope we'll turn into zombies instead.

Blogger BadDave said...
Kazam - I disagree. Even though it's not good press, it still generates publicity. Neither the Eagles nor the NFL is having any issues with the Vicktriolic hatred from some fans. That's a statement about American culture and the nagging bitches we are. Excuse me while I get my gun, shoot a democrat, and then sue the firearm manufacturer for not telling me that guns can kill.

Anonymous Marc d. said...
Speaking of zombies, is anyone else really upset about the treatment of zombies in the media recently? They used to be such a noble species, just shuffling about their business, eating brains and generally keeping to themselves. Now they are playing guitar, showing up in the Old West, and making Jane Austen novels even worse. It's a disgrace! If the zombies were still in their graves, they'd be rolling over in them!

Blogger Basketbawful said...
Speaking of zombies, is anyone else really upset about the treatment of zombies in the media recently? They used to be such a noble species, just shuffling about their business, eating brains and generally keeping to themselves. Now they are playing guitar, showing up in the Old West, and making Jane Austen novels even worse. It's a disgrace! If the zombies were still in their graves, they'd be rolling over in them!

Comment of the Day.

Blogger Wild Yams said...
Mr. Bawful - "How many times, on this site alone, do people make reference to Kobe's rape trial? A rape for which, I should point out, Bryant was never convicted."

I just wanted to point out that not only was Kobe not convicted, but the trial actually never happened. The DA dropped the case before it ever went to trial. There were some preliminary hearings, but it was never brought to trial.

Blogger Jason D said...
No better way to start the day than with a cup of coffee, and some classic Chuck. Love it!

Blogger Dan B. said...
Comment of the Day.

I'd say comment of the week, and considering we're only one week into the new year, I guess I'd call it Comment of the Year (To This Point). Knowing our readership, I'm sure it will be outdone, but it's still solid.

Blogger Jason D said...
I might as well get in on this thing (late to the party but hey, it's 9am here in Sydney). I'm a big believer in second chances, I think that people should be given the opportunity to make amends for wrongs they've done. There is a line, though, where a crime is so heinous that a second chance is not warranted. Rape and murder are the two that come to mind (totally against the death penalty though, that's the easy way out for those bastards). In Vick's case, what he did was wrong, abhorred and totally inhumane. However, I tend to side with Tree here in that I have much more empathy for a crime committed against a human than I do for animals.

I can understand why people get upset over animal cruelty. They are naiive, and have no idea why they are being treated in such a way, and that does invoke a lot of sympathy in people. But, to me, an innocent person being beaten for no good reason, or murdered, or raped, is much, much worse. This is a person that could have a family, could be the breadwinner, an if they are affected, not only does it impact them, but it impacts those around them.

A good example would be a recent story here. A man was bashed in Kings Cross (kind of the seedy club area of Sydney) and was rushed to hospital. According to all reports, the man had done nothing wrong, and had a loving family. Tragically, the man died from the injuries he suffered and nobody knows who is responsible for the beating. To me, to see a family in a situation where the legal system has no idea how to help them, to lose a loving member of a family, is much more depressing to me than dogfighting. That is in no way saying that dogfighting is right, or that it can be allowed, but that bad shit happening to people is worse.

Like I said, this is my opinion and I respect everyone's opinion on this site (even the Laker haters).

And yea, screw Sterling. Poor Blake.

Anonymous Pistoletti said...
wv: menable

as in

There are few menable to hilariously comment on zombies like Marc d.

Blogger Wormboy said...
The Kobe thing ain't black and white, but merely a useful illustration of how the stink sticks to celebrities. The flip side is the wealth available to them. They choose that life; whining about it when their misdeeds blow up in their face doesn't help. To his credit, Kobe hasn't whined about that. he knows he was stupid to even get in that situation.

Barkley's point is well made: Vick paid his debt to society. So drop it. As some noted, the commentariat doesn't refer to Kobe's rape case any more, nor should they refer to Vick's crime any more. That's where Carlson was out of line, and Barkley was right on call him on it. The fact that Carlson is a prat whose ass was owned by Jon Stewart just makes it, well, a little more tasty.

As for the inconsistencies in sentencing, it's an ugly truth of the justice system; celebrities frequently get away with crimes. And you've only heard of the ones that weren't covered up. Who's to say Little wasn't also busted a couple of times, but the local cops let him go because they're football fans? It's all luck, good or bad. Vick was unlucky in that he was a high profile player whose misdeeds occurred in the wrong place and wrong time for Vick. It happens all the time, to normal folks, celebrities and politicians. Little, on the other hand, got treated with kid gloves. In a fair world, Little would do 15 years, no career, done. But the world ain't fair. And just because Little didn't get suitably punished doesn't mean that Vick should be let off. Two wrongs don't make a right. The appropriate response would be to get worked up about the Little cases of the world, not the Vick cases, no?

But even though I think that Vick deserved his sentence (or maybe a little harsh, a year may have sufficed), I think Barkley is absolutely right to defend him. Vick was punished, let him try to make something of himself again. Kudos for him not being a whiny brat about it. He's manning up and trying to make the best of the mess of his life. I admire that kind of balls in whomever I see it.

Anonymous Czernobog said...
Ugh. So much crap to wade through.

Michael Vick has borne the punishment meted to him by the judicial system, and therefore has every right to pursue whatever personal or financial goals he may have. Did he pay his debt to society? I'd have an opinion on that if the phrase "debt to society" meant anything, which it doesn't.

Bottom line is that it would take a lot more than a prison sentance to convince me that somenoe who enjoyed and facilitated dogfights in the past is anything other than a piece of shit.

As for Leonard Little - his story has nothing to do with Michael Vick. Bringing him up is a worthy notion in itself, but a cheap attempt to derail any kind of meaningful dialogue when brought up as an argument regarding Vick's situation. If you care so much about DUIs and other traffic violations that you bring him up at every opportunity than I take my hat off to you, but if you only bring him up in the context of other accused athletes then STFU you hypocritical cocksucker.

Personally, I think the media needs to be taken to task for the way they cover these stories. They lack any kind of moral backbone and would do anything to avoid showing up an athlete for the social menace he might be. And while I don't live in the states, I believe the courts are far to lenient towards reckless drivers in my country and wish the laws were more strict.

But I'm not stupid or dishonest enough to compare vehicular manslaughter to prolonged and premeditated animal abuse and say "look, people care more about animals then humans."

Vick is a piece of Shit. I hope he contracts Ebola and dies of internal hemorraging. Little is a piece of shit too. I hope he suffocates on elephant feces.

But their respective infractions have no bearing on one another. And pretending that they do is dishonest.

Anonymous Toby said...
The difference often times, between animals suffering abuse and humans suffering abuse, is that the latter can be easily misconstrued as someone's personal affair and therefore nobody else's business. Case in point: I studied abroad in Italy while in college, in Florence and there's a large population of vagabonds and gypsies, who all have dogs. One day while at an open market, I saw a gypsy sitting nearby bite a puppy on the scruff of it's neck for misbehaving. The puppy yelped and several people rushed over to confront the gypsy. He told them all to mind their own business or something like that and after a little yelling, nothing more happened. But what if he would have struck his wife or child instead? Would anybody have been outraged? Or intervened? I would say no, no one would have–that would have been intruding upon his own personal affairs. Onlookers might not have agreed but most likely they wouldn't have said anything. But yet when this gypsy disciplined his puppy in the same way another dog would have, he's reprimanded by an outraged public. And that's wrong. We as a society should be far more concerned with human abuse than animal abuse. Both are very wrong, but humans are still far more important than animals.

And Czernobog, you're mixing several comments together I believe. The Leonard Little story was brought up as a comparison in punishment, public reaction and collective memory, not in the way you insinuate. Adam said he was more likely to sympathize with a random animal than a random human and my little story, though partly conjecture, supports the notion that that feeling may be widespread. No one has connected Vick's crime with Little's crime in the way you have suggested.

Anonymous kazam92 said...
Czernobog, when I have this argument, its people like you who maintain this stance/ I don't think Vick is a piece of shit. He made a mistake, the point being the value of the mistake differs greatly in certain peoples eyes. Me? Look I don't like pets. Don't really care for dogs. So yeah, its kinda natural I wouldn't hate him as much as a PETA member. While I find your stance overly harsh, I can't really say you are wrong for feeling as such.

But now I feel dumb for postin the video. Mocking bad basketball players has turned into an ethical and moral discussion which won't get anywhere

Anonymous Marc d. said...
For the record, it was never my intention to bring up the human vs animal debate but rather the celebrity vs normal person justice disparity.

As a card-carrying nerd, I generally think all jocks are pieces of shit anyway, so, whatever.

Blogger b r christensen said...
jazz play by play guy referencing turnover filled second quarter, "right now it's sloppy seconds."

Anonymous Anonymous said...
"Holding a grudge is akin to holding a burning piece of coal and hoping the other person gets burned."

None of us are perfect. There will be things we will struggle to forgive, and other things that we individually can not forgive. But I believe a system that allows for maturation and change, that allows for forgiveness after punishment ultimately makes the world a better place.

Blogger zyth said...
uh, could someone please explain to me what the hell is Monta wearing during warmups? it can be seen in the recap @ 0:08

Blogger JerryT said...
After a tough loss the great tactic, Sun Tzu once said: 在面孔的手 , which in translation to english would mean something like "hand in the face". Phoenix should listen to Sun Tzu.

Blogger AnacondaHL said...
I wake up this morning having missed the game, entirely expecting the Suns to have lost to the Knicks by maybe 7 points led by Amare's 35+ points.

Only to find out Josh Childress was our starting Center.

And we lost by 25 points.

I mean, are we afraid that playing the optimal lineup but still losing would break all hope, so we throw out this shit instead?

Blogger Basketbawful said...
I just wanted to point out that not only was Kobe not convicted, but the trial actually never happened. The DA dropped the case before it ever went to trial. There were some preliminary hearings, but it was never brought to trial.

That's true, but it wasn't dropped because the DA thought Kobe was innocent. It happened because Kobe and his accuser reached an out of court settlement and so she chose not to proceed with a trial.

Basically, Mamba paid to make the problem go away. I'm not saying that makes him guilty or innocent, but simply stating that the DA dropped the case misses an important point, don't you think?

Anonymous AK Dave said...

You're confusing the criminal and civil cases. Yams was right- the DA dropped the criminal case before it went to trial and there was no settlement or anything- the case was literally dropped. Kobe is not a criminal, or a rapist, or anything, because the state never pressed charges.

The District Attorney handles the criminal case- he dropped that case because he did not have enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kobe committed rape.

The civil case was handled by lawyers for Kobe and that woman. That case never went to trial because they reached an out-of-court settlement.

The most important distinction between the cases is this: the criminal trial involves jail time, the civil case involves money. The criminal trial cannot be "settled out of court", except by way of a plea bargain- but Kobe did not bargain with the DA to plead guilty in exchange for a reduced sentence. The DA dropped the charges altogether. Kobe's attorney and the woman accuser, however, reached an out-of-court settlement in the civil trial for several likely reasons:

1) Kobe probably wanted to stop all the negative press and paying her whatever he did (it was an "undisclosed amount") was worth not having an ongoing trial for the media to chew on

2) Kobe wanted to stop paying lawyer fees and by settling, he ends the suit and stops the slow bleeding of paying lawyers

3) Kobe wanted to move on with his fucking life. Settling the case- even though he didn't do anything- effectively ended that chapter of his life, allowing him to get back to basketball.

4) Juries are unpredictable. In a civil case, the jury may award money to the plaintiff if they are 51% sure that the defendant is liable. Anything can happen at trial, and its a very risky proposition for both sides. That is why less than 5% of all civil cases ever go to trial. They almost always settle out-of-court because the two sides don't want to risk everything by going to trial and putting the decision into the hands of strangers. Furthermore, even if you "win" at trial, you pay through the nose because trials are about the most expensive part of any lawsuit. At some point you have to look at the big picture and ask whether or not it's worth it to go through the hassle instead of just paying some cash and getting it over with- right or wrong. It's, in effect, a business decision.

I don't know what really went on, but these are the common reasons why a person settles out of court.

In any event, settling a civil case DOES NOT IMPLY GUILT. It only shows that you wanted to settle the case. In fact, the word "guilty" only applies to a criminal proceeding. So using it in the civil context is incorrect.

That is why it is a HUGE deal that the DA dropped his case. Any DA would love to put a famous athlete behind bars- that is what they live for. The fact that he didn't have enough evidence to where he felt he could prove his case is very, very telling.

Anonymous Stockton said...
Kim Kardashian hooking up with KRIS HUMPHRIES????

New frontcourt in LA, anyone?

Blogger Dan B. said...
After a tough loss the great tactic, Sun Tzu once said: 在面孔的手 , which in translation to english would mean something like "hand in the face". Phoenix should listen to Sun Tzu.

And we have a challenger for Comment of the Year, I see. (Seriously, my nose burns from laughing while drinking root beer now)

Blogger Basketbawful said...
You're confusing the criminal and civil cases. Yams was right- the DA dropped the criminal case before it went to trial and there was no settlement or anything- the case was literally dropped. Kobe is not a criminal, or a rapist, or anything, because the state never pressed charges.

According to the link Yams posted, the DA dropped the case because Kobe's accuser didn't want to proceed, and the article further stated that it was assumed she didn't want to proceed because a settlement was close in the civil case.

Blogger KHayes666 said...
Taking a break from all the depressive Michael Vick and Kobe criminal talk:


Doc Rivers is showing Von Wafer how to get his next Mario

Anonymous Anonymous said...
michael vick should be forced to live in a cage in dana white's basement for the rest of his life and fight at every single UFC event with no warning or knowledge about his opponent. also, no medical attention afterwards, just back to the cage when he's done getting his ass kicked.

little's DUI case wasn't premeditated. just someone with problems who got really unlucky. he didn't go out drinking that night thinking,"let's see if i can take out a family tonight." actually, he might have; i don't know him or what's going on inside his mind. but still, it's not like he kidnapped a family and locked them in a cage and then forced them to fight his car.

i absolutely sympathize more with dogs than humans. they have rougher lives. the average dog has to deal with assault, murder, and rape on a regular basis. the average human has never even been in a real fight or had a real threat on their life. go to petsmart and look at their dog hotel and really pay attention. you will see a rape in the corner before long while all the humans are looking at the biggest dog in the middle of the room. you'll also see a couple of willing hook ups and a lot of shit no one else notices.

most humans are completely spoiled. put a dog into a human's body, and it'll do fine. go to some location, push a couple buttons, fetch some shit, suck up to some asshole, go home, sleep. repeat daily. food is everywhere, no physical altercations or rapes to worry about, for the most part, the most stressful thing for a human is getting their feelings hurt or someone having a different opinion from them. put any of you humans into a dog's body and you will be raped and assaulted daily. a dog in a human's body would dominate every sport based on its instincts. a human in a dog's body will be every other dog's bitch.

i am sorry for your brother that was assaulted, but at least that's not everyday life for him. he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and got unlucky. at least he gets to go to the hospital and now he's better. it'll make him stronger. once he conquers his fear, he'll have the instincts of an animal and notice things that 99% of humans do not. he will have problems and completely different priorities from the rest of society now. a lot of shit will be going on inside him that you will have no grasp on. don't let the fear consume him, be supportive and help him through it, now that he's seen what's really important in life (not getting killed), he can get stronger and smarter than ever before.

HOOOLYYY SHIIIT!!!!! You people are so unmerciful!!! Someone posted that they were upset because commentators/broadcasters don't mention the fact that Kobe had a rap case against him before. Really??? And no kid should ever buy a Vick jersey or hang a poster of him because of what he did AND ALREADY SERVED HIS TIME FOR. I for one would let my son hang a poster of Vick and I might even myself. Vick is an inspiration to me because I made alot of mistakes in my youth but I sure hope that now that I've paid my debts I will be allowed to move on. I know certain people won't be able to get past it, but all I want is my second chance. It's just shocking because I was always told before you criticize someone else, look in the mirror first. I think alot of y'all have need to check yaself before you start breaking down Kobe and Vick 'cause everyone's shit stinks.

Blogger Jason D said...

Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% on the American legal system, but I thought that in criminal cases the victim can only press charges and after that, it's out of their hands, which would leave the DA with control over whether there is in fact enough evidence to prosecute. I could be totally wrong, though.

As for the Kobe thing, I don't think anyone will truly know what happened. I'd hate to think that my favourite player is guilty of such a thing, and as far as I know there is little evidence to support claims that he is. Adultery? Sure, what superstar athlete isn't? I remember reading somewhere (may have even been this site) that in the 80's Magic Johnson would order a "rainbow", basically 5 or so women each of a different race, after a game. Talk about carefree. I won't even go into how that was probably a bad idea though.

Anonymous kazam92 said...


Anonymous AK Dave said...
Hmm. Well it seems highly unusual that the state would drop its case pending anything having to do with a civil case, mostly because the civil case usually follows the criminal case. Unless the victim knows it's bullshit and wants to cash in before the jury in the criminal court acquits.

In any event, the state does not drop charges because of anything having to do with the civil trial. Would the prosecutor in the OJ criminal case drop the charges because OJ was "close to a settlement" in the civil case? Fuck and no. If the DA can put a rapist or a murderer behind bars, they will do it 100 out of 100 times, regardless of whether or not the defendant is "close to a settlement" in the civil side. In fact, that would be prosecutorial misconduct if they simply dropped a case because of something going on in a civil case. The DA will ONLY drop charges (absent bribery or other underhanded shenanigans) if they don't think they can win the case. Period. Something doesn't jibe with that article.

Anyway fuck it. I'm drunk. Know why?



Anonymous AK Dave said...
AFter reading that MSNBC article:

The accuser backed out and it was speculated it was because she was close to settlement. My initial suspicion was correct: she knew that she couldn't win the case in a criminal court, the DA knew it, and so they dropped the charges.

It made sense to drop the charges from the "victim"s standpoint because if Kobe was acquitted, it would reduce the amount of $$$ she could get in her civil case. (People would believe that if he wasn't convicted in criminal court, he's not guilty, so why award her money?)

So, it wasn't the DA's call. The DA could give a shit what happened in a civil case. It was the shrewd business acumen of the "victim" who realized she couldn't win the criminal case and she drop the charges and try and make more money, which is what she was after all along.


Anonymous Anonymous said...
The Mavericks annoucers are godawful. Some gems:

"The Mavs are trading baskets a bit right now. They need to continue scoring baskets while stopping the Magic from getting them."

On Dwight Howard getting his 3rd foul: "Ryan Anderson makes 3 point baskets instead of two point baskets, so you have to be careful."

And why do the Mavs need 3 annoucers? The 3rd guy just chimes in with random non-sequitors and is completely useless.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Bawful, if she had really been sexually assaulted, she would not have wanted to drop the criminal case. I think most rape victims would like to see the man who did it brought to justice. The fact she may not have proceeded as she was getting a cash settlement suggests this is what she wanted in the first place.

Anonymous kazam92 said...
Did no one look at Earl "Motherfucking" Boykins? That actually happened. I guess my link was bad so


Anonymous Anonymous said...
The reason she dropped the accusation and made the cash grab was because the facts for Kobe's side came out. The multiple men's semen in her underwear, the fact that she bragged about it and the fact that she tried this same extortion stunt before.

The evidence that the prosecution had was slight bruising in the genetalia, implying some kind of forced activity. With multiple men's semen found in her underwear, this brings up VERY reasonable doubt that Kobe was not the one to cause the trauma. The fact that she bragged about sex with Kobe (and had people willing to testify about this in court) does not mean anything from a legal sense, but juries tend not to look favorably upon this sort of thing. The delay in reporting, combined with the above facts is a credible defense in and of itself.

Sadly enough, the fact that she tried to extort another man for money with a rape accusation may not have reached trial due to statutes about "not putting the victim on trial" which is horseshit of the highest degree but still was a legal gambit that Kobe's defense team could have tried to play which would have meant more time in court, more legal wrangling, and if Kobe's team had won this motion/series of motions to allow this, her case basically is DOA.

To make a long story short, once things started turning against her, she made the cash grab, Kobe paid her a pittance (a few million dollars) and didn't take the chance of a largely white jury in a white state siding against the famous black athlete and siding with the pretty white blonde girl. The fact that the DA dropped the case means nothing as far as guilt/innocence goes, because without her testimony there is exactly 0.000 chance of a conviction. So buying her silence essentially forces the DA's hand. No accuser, no rape.

The more facts in the case you see, the better Kobe's side looks. As said above though, the chance to give away a small percentage of his net worth to make it all go away (including the legal fees) and not take the chance (however small it may have ended up being) that a jury does something crazy probably seemed like a good idea at the time, something I can't really argue with. As any 1st year law student knows, juries combined of dumb people tend to do some really dumb shit. Whenever 12 morons talk something over, you have no idea what's going to happen. OJ got away after all.

Blogger Wild Yams said...
None of us will ever know whether Kobe raped that woman or not, but I've always felt like this about it: whatever happend, the way it shook out the accuser was apparently satisfied (she didn't want to testify, so she didn't, and she got her cash settlement), Kobe's wife has never seemed to be anything other than satisfied (even though reportedly she and Kobe have no prenuptial agreement, meaning she could have easily divorced him for half or more if she wanted to), and Kobe seems to be satisfied just that it's all behind him. Given that we have no way of knowing what really happened, if these three individuals seem to be OK with how it all wrapped up, why should anyone else care? If they're not upset about it, why should we be?

Blogger Dan B. said...
kazam92 -- Is that real or just a photoshop? The last time I saw something that awesome, it sadly ended up being fake. (From the phenomenal Pittsburgh Penguins fansite thepensblog, the "Too Much Man" penalty being photoshopped over the "Too Many Men" penalty because Gary Roberts is, indeed, too much man.)

Anonymous kazam92 said...
The guy who posted it started trending on twitter if that means anything. I can't tell you if it is real or not

Blogger The Dude Abides said...
The anonymous poster at 1/09/2011 at 3:09 AM hit the nail on the head. Kobe's side had multiple friends and ex-friends of KF lined up to testify against her, both in the criminal case and the civil case. The slight bruising of her genitalia was accounted for by having multiple sexual partners and sexual acts in a time period of less than 24 hours. The DNA evidence that turned up semen from two different men (and none from Kobe, who only left pre-ejaculatory fluid) pretty much ended her case. What rape victim makes a booty call and goes out and gets laid immediately after being raped? So yes, we DO know what happened in that hotel room, with a greater than 99% certainty.

Blogger KHayes666 said...
Bad news for Laker fans:


They're not 3-peating without him.

Anonymous kazam92 said...
Speaking of Kobe rape, LeBron just raped Portland and shat on their souls. Disgustingly beautiful

Anonymous The Other Chris said...
Holy good god that box score is hilarious. The non-Big 3 members of the Heat combined - COMBINED - for 11 points. 4-14 from the floor. Two free throw attemps. More turnovers than field goals + free throws.

Joel Anthony had 0 rebounds in 29 minutes - hell, he basically contributed nothing, at least statistically. That is some PhD level Bawful right there.

Also, we should all enjoy this, from the AP recap of the Clippers/Warriors game:

"Los Angeles alternates electrifying alley-oop jams and 3-pointers with boneheaded turnovers and defensive mistakes"

True story.

Blogger Wild Yams said...
KHayes666 - The Lakers won the title last year with Ron Artest as the only SF on the team (Luke Walton technically was too, though he was hurt almost the entire season), so I don't think that Matt Barnes is that essential to the Lakers winning it all this year. That said, Barnes should be back in March, so it looks like they will have him for the playoffs. In the meantime the Lakers will simply have to make due with Artest playing more than the 27 minutes per game he's been averaging this year, while also giving Luke Walton some time (he's only averaging 7 mpg this year as the 3rd string SF). Kobe can also cover SF some with Shannon Brown picking up the SG minutes, and the Lakers have called up Devin Ebanks from the D-League to be the 3rd string SF for now. The Lakers should be fine in Barnes' absence. LA really has the depth to cover Barnes being out for 2 months.

Blogger Bing said...
For a while I wanted Walton gone. Except for The Machine he was top of the shit list.
However, he seems to be a steadyhand when it comes to actually running the offense instead of just freewheeling and jacking up anything and everything (Kobe).
I like Barnes, he is useful but more burn for Walton will be good news for a team trying to right a ship that's been going badly wrong of late.
As for Ron Ron, it's been a season and a 1/3 and I can't decided if I like him as a Laker. Bar Game 7, of course.

Anonymous AK Dave said...

Further to what Yams said, Barnes hasn't even been a major contributor this season. He is an OK role player and a streaky shooter. His defense is good, but not great. As much as I love shoveling dirt on the Laker's grave as much as the next guy, I think LA will survive without him. As many people mention regularly around here, Bynum's health is the real key come the playoffs.

Anonymous Shiv said...
Umm, Darko outplaying Duncan? True story...

In related news: The world is ending.

Anonymous Stockton said...
That rockets' last play in the 4th was... what's worse than horrible?

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Bawful from over the pond: In the French Pro A league, the visiting Strasbourg team was utterly-utterly smushed by the Orléans team 39-96. 39-96!!! They went scoreless for the second quarter! NO POINTS FOR AN ENTIRE QUARTER!! Orléans scored 34 points in that second quarter! And Strasbourg shot 25% from the field, hitting only 7 field goals. AND they commited 25 turnovers, while Orléans commited only 8.
For the gak-inducing box score:

Blogger Wormboy said...
@ The Dude Abides: "The anonymous poster at 1/09/2011 at 3:09 AM hit the nail on the head. Kobe's side had multiple friends and ex-friends of KF lined up to testify against her, both in the criminal case and the civil case. The slight bruising of her genitalia was accounted for by having multiple sexual partners and sexual acts in a time period of less than 24 hours. The DNA evidence that turned up semen from two different men (and none from Kobe, who only left pre-ejaculatory fluid) pretty much ended her case. What rape victim makes a booty call and goes out and gets laid immediately after being raped? So yes, we DO know what happened in that hotel room, with a greater than 99% certainty."

Actually, you're repeating defense statements, which are interpretations of data and not actual facts. Bruising of genitalia could be EITHER from multiple partners or rough, forced sex from a single partner. The DNA evidence established that she had had sex with one or more other men in an unspecified period that includes well before the alleged assault: consistent with EITHER the defense's interpretation, or consistent with having a boyfriend that she'd had sex with in the previous few days. Assume, for example, that one of our partners were raped (God forbid). Would you want the defense to assume she was a ho because there was evidence of a sexual partner other than the accused? On the flip side, Kobe had her blood on his shirt, consistent with rough and maybe forced sex.

Remember, look at data from both sides, and NEVER take the word of the lawyers who are working the case: they have a strongly vested interest in spinning the outcome. Rape trials are frequently tried in the court of public opinion, massively more so for celebrities.

But the point isn't really misrepresenting the existing data, the point is that you can't really prove rape without a third party witness, particularly if the accused claims consensual sex and has a good reason to be at the scene. It comes down to he said-she said, and that is rarely going to result in a conviction, and often not even in a trial (which is why so many rapes go unreported). That is the case even with an unimpeachable accuser, which clearly wasn't the case here (she had a history of mental health problems and somewhat erratic behavior, though not nearly so much as the Duke lacrosse accuser, with whom the facts are frequently confused in hindsight).

So the upshot is that we can't know, one way or the other. All the external speculation is just hot air (usually true for rape cases, btw). For example, wouldn't you agree that emotionally unstable women are more likely to get themselves into sketchy situations, and thus are more likely to be raped? This isn't a blaming the victim exercise, but just an observation that the good girls are going to have better instincts and habits that enable them to avoid rape better. Some of them will still get raped, but less likely, wouldn't you agree? So then what value is the character defense in a rape trial? Are dumb women or women with poor judgment less worthy to be protected by the law? I don't buy the "she asked for it" argument at all. So that leaves us with a somewhat unstable woman who put herself in a bad situation. Maybe she wanted to have sex with Kobe, but it got too violent or kinky? She has the right to say no there, correct? Maybe she did it and regretted it afterward. Maybe she's just a gold-digger. We can't know, and it behooves us to be rational and fair on the subject, eh?

Links to this post:
Create a Link