Spin control

The NBA is in full spin control and David Stern is sounding more and more like Roger Clemens in relation to the latest allegations from Tim Donaghy. Stern has been all bluster and no substance, attacking the character of the accuser while sidestepping any real comment on the claims themselves.

My guess is that Stern would like this to go away....probably as much, if not more than the NFL wants Arlen Specter to go away.

The problem is part of Stern's reasoning.

Sterns recent comments about Donaghy -

"Because a convicted felon said something about his colleagues in order to lower his time away, am I worried about that? I'm worried that someone is out there saying it, but you're the one who will either deal with it or not as part of the media. We've been as open and transparent as we can be...But we'll stay with it, and we have no doubt that Mr. Donaghy is the only one here that's guilty of criminal activity."

Those are made all the more interesting in light of this quote from 2006 when Donaghy was still on the league's payroll - "I think we have the best officials, the best-monitored officials, the best-developed officials in all of sports."

They have "the best-monitored officials" in all of sports? Yet a majority of the officials were, at the time, in violation of the league's gambling policy, and they knew nothing of Donaghy's violations?

Now Stern expects us to believe the denials the league is issuing?

That's the height of arrogance.

Of course, considering Donaghy's claims, in essence, are an indictment of Stern, he's going to deny the claims. Stern is telling us that the league has been transparent, and that the feds have found no violations beyond Donaghy's - but can anyone out there tell me exactly what the Feds were investigating? Were they investigating the league, or were they investigating Donaghy? Because if it was just Donaghy, it was out of the purview of their investigation, it was not an investigation into what other officials may have been doing. What did the league even investigate? Gambling?

What has really done by the league to look into this? I know they found that a whole bunch of other officials violated league rules and then were given a free pass. Hell, Stern suggested changing the rule to accommodate the violators. So why should I believe Stern on this? I mean, that could be construed as a payoff - a free pass in exchange for the silence of the violators...assuming that Donaghy is indeed telling the truth.

There are a lot of reasons that you could give for Donaghy lying about this, but Sterns reasons for possibly putting the fix on games has to do with a league whose net worth is in the billions. A lot of money is a lot of motivation to make sure the league continues netting maximum profits - and max profits are definitely not Sacramento making the finals over the Lakers.

Once again - I'm not saying I believe Donaghy. But I am saying that I don't think Stern is any more credible than Donaghy, and that Donaghy's claims have to be given at least enough weight to merit an investigation, if for no other reason than to put this to rest once and for all.

As for Stern - he might want to consider NOT taking a page from the Roger Clemens playbook on this one.

And let's just note - if an independent investigation reveals Donaghy to be correct - let's start talking about the validity of Phil Jackson's genius and post-season record.

Credibility and other things on my mind...

"I’ve never seen a game like that in all these years I’ve coached in The Finals"

-Phil Jackson on game two of the Finals when the Celtics went to the foul line by an almost 4 to 1 margin.

The same Phil Jackson whose Laker team benefited from a 28 to 10 margin in the fourth quarter of a semi-finals game against the Kings to get to a game 7. The same game that disgraced official Tim Donaghy implied was fixed to give the Lakers the win in order to get the team to game 7.

The same Phil Jackson whose Laker team, earlier in the playoffs, went to the line 43 times against the Jazz's 16.

Of course Jackson was going to point out the free-throw disparity, because the actual proportion of fouls called in that game - 4-3 (28 on L.A., 21 on Boston - which, of course, is more an indictment of the Lakers' play in that game than the officiating).

Game 3...

The third game is not a game that should have given the Lakers a lot of confidence. Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett played poorly and the Lakers could only win by six, and they couldn't score 90 on their home floor against Boston.

At this point, I'm thinking the C's win in six, giving the Boston faithful something to celebrate on the parquet.

The Fix is in...

For years pundits and fans alike have speculated that the fix may very well be in when it comes to the post-season in the NBA. Now it seems as though most of those pundits are very quick to come to the NBA's defense in regards to Tim Donaghy's allegations about fixing games.

Of course, this is also the same press that was quick to dismiss Jose Canseco's allegations of steroid use in Major League Baseball, in spite of the fact that others before him - including the late Ken Caminiti, a former MVP and steroid user - had already made the same claims.

Personally, I think Donaghy is on the level regarding this. Or at the very least, he believes he is on the level.

Let's consider two very important facts in regards to that particular year -

First - a game seven would generate significant additional revenue for the league and give the Lakers an extra shot at getting to the finals.

Second - what team is going to garner the most viewers? The Kings or the Lakers? As such, which team is going to generate the most advertising revenue?

Circumstantially, the evidence really does favor Donaghy, and not just in this instance.

Anyone else waiting to hear Arlen Specter crying foul? I mean, this isn't a team trying to break the rules - this is a league trying to fix games, if what Donaghy says has even an iota of truth.

This requires an independent investigation far more than any issues the NFL is currently facing.

Here's one final NBA thought to leave everyone with - How, exactly, did David Stern turn the league around? Adding games in the playoffs?

Dontrelle Willis...

Am I the only one that saw this one coming?

Willis, often billed as the second coming of Lefty Grove, has had only one ace-like season under his belt when he went 22-10 with a 2.63 ERA en route to the World Series. Only once has he won more than 14 games. His ERA has increased by one run or more in each of the last three seasons.

This season Willis is no longer in the hitters' B-league and only twice has lasted more than two innings and only once as long as five. In five appearances he has averaged two innings per appearance and is giving up over ten runs per nine innings.

Okay, this is worse than what I thought, but I didn't think the Willis trade and signing was that great a move by Detroit.