Okay. So I have been pretty down on my post a few days ago on the NBA and it being rigged. My post was highly reckless and unreadable. My points possibly cogent but the verbiage undisciplined and dense, especially for a blog. So with this I am going to at once highlight my blogging weaknesses, yet further elaborate on my point. The following is a fairly enjoyable mish-mash of emails between myself and dan ruth and eric rasco, two great and very intelligent producer friends of mine. They think I am loony on this theory, as most do. We exchanged these notes and this added up to the least productive half workday I have ever, in 10 years, had. But I appreciate their engagement of me and my points. If you have interest as to why the NBA is or is not totally rigged, see below, possibly best from bottom, my primary point probably in a bold note far below. But it starts at the beginning, at bottom, with rasco saying I sound “like a crazy guy with aluminum foil on his windows.” Indeed...
From: Daniel Ruth
To: Eric Rasco
Cc: David Rolfe
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:10:54 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep... to boil down rolfe’s point: whistles are blown unnecessarily to aid super stars to win in the playoffs, these superstars are pre-chosen by the nba based on when they "feel" it's their time, this is all driven by the fact that internationally this will drum up more money if super stars succeed because this will give more reach and exposure which equals more money to the nba. i will follow with a 3 page counter point in 6 hours.
From: David Rolfe
To: 'erasco@gmail.com'
Cc: 'danruth@gmail.com'
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:12:14 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep...
And I don’t disagree with that. And for the same reason— along with that I basically devoted 15 years of my life to playing it, in both my 20’s and 30’s— is why I dig it too. I haven’t said I don’t. I just think it, professionally, is peculiar and it think the peculiarities bout it are very apparent. A ref in the last 3 minutes of a playoff game is more prominent than any flying, shooting, dunking great player or team. On 11/19/09 12:42 PM, "Eric Rasco" <erasco@gmail.com> wrote:
I agreeing with u about Chinese hype factor, just pointing out how real and spreading that is. I guess watching a "real" sport isn't what necessarily interests me (should I be watching golf or Olympic wrestling or swimming?). What interests me is sports as the juncture between entertainment, athleticism, personalities, and rules. And for me, the NBA is the best combo of those things by far, and it is partly by the league's design, and that don't bother me one bit.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ On Nov 19, 2009, at 12:21 PM, David Rolfe wrote:
I don't know. I don't know how it works really. I don't think boston's championship ascendency was that predictable, I don't think they culd have known that paul pierce was going to come around like he did. But I do know that they love how that occurs for a guy like garnett-- to work that hard for so long in a mini-market like minn, then reward him for that effort. The formula all works very for the sustainability of the league.
From: Eric Rasco
To: David Rolfe
Cc:
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:22:30 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep... Will stern get a marquee free agent to join Wade in Miami this offseason?
Did stern organize gasol and Garnett trades? These are real questions btw
On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Dave Rolfe <drolfe@cpbgroup.com <mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com> > wrote: Good points. But it stymied nash for sure. I def think nash is a huge guy. It is just hard to protect (in the sense that I'm saying in my primary arguement) a guy like nash. He is not the type of scorer that can be easily/automatically sent to the line last 3 mins. Chris paul will need to figure that out, and I think u will gradually see him perhaps play as a 2-guard more and more. It will become in his best interest ultimately. So I bet u'll see tremendous improvement in his j over the next two seasons.
From: Daniel Ruth
To: David Rolfe
Cc: erasco@gmail.com
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:24:42 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep... disastrous in the sense that everyone knew d'antoni was leaving and the 7 second offense was going away, and shaq changes that system.
remember that was a mid-season trade with shaq and his horrible attitude with miami.
not the player.
dude was seriously great last year.
On Nov 19, 2009, at 12:21 PM, David Rolfe wrote:
I think it was the phoenix year that shaq truly expired as an actual player. Nash and many others felt that it was a disasterous move. So he became purely a marketing factor at that. A big one though.
From: Daniel Ruth
To: David Rolfe
Cc: erasco@gmail.com
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:17:37 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep...
shaq played awesome last year in phx BTW.
not that this really matters and this is not supporting that statement, but he did make the all-star team for the first time in a long time.
On Nov 19, 2009, at 12:18 PM, "David Rolfe" <DRolfe@cpbgroup.com> wrote:
Also, on wade, they're trying to figure out how he can ascend without murdering himself. He is incredible. Arguably the best in league. But he is not a shooter like jord/kobe. his shooting is either set shot or slash. The slashing thing works brilliantly in accordance with willing wins and stern’s support because it is easy to whistle— it is a functioning model for my theory. But then they found his ass on the floor all the time and knew it wasn't a sustainable strat (for him, or league) due to injury potential. So he is great and will be-- I not saying he not-- but he is not quite yet a shot creator in a sustainable way like kobe. He is working on it though. He won the oympics for the US. the point is that you need players in the jord/kobe model because they play in a way that it is easy to whistle— thus they are easy to gift through to the playoffs. Then you lighten up on their (LA, for instance) defensive fouls— though not too much, the bigger strat is to gift the offensive star— and you have a series win. But the offensive player has to fit the model. also I think that lebron is a little bit tougher to gift than kobe, due to his size. It just doesn’t feel as easy to whistle when lebron slashes because he is displacing bodies so much. Kobe-type (and wade-type) is easier to make it appear as if whistles are justified.
From: David Rolfe
To: 'erasco@gmail.com'
Cc: 'danruth@gmail.com'
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:12:14 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep...
Yes on Orl. But that, per my original blog, was cuz of literally uncanny 3-point shooting, end-of-game (by rashard), this the only way to break the control-factor. But on the Finals themselves, it didn't matter as long as at least one of kobe/lebron in. Then, on Celts/kobe it didn't matter-- they had a dramatic finals series. All the nba's interest there was prolongment of series (which they gotta do lightly). But personally I think kobe told stern to fuck off once he lost that series (you want your new Jordan or not, stern??), and then stern said fine, I get it, please beat some ass in the reg season nxt year. I sorry but I think it is that crazy and rigged. I do. The other examples u make below are just games/series. Not as consequential. As in, the star power that jordan carried, vs, like... um I can't even remember who Jordan played against, he was so singular. So that is the model. Stern wants wade up there. The heat just fucked themselves up too much, it a little hard to control that shit. The heat fucked themselves btw because they had shaq. He held em for a year and then it silly. Teams get shaq for marketing bucks. I think that's the real reason cavs have him now. The more eyes on the Cavs makes lebron happy. It aint stealing attn, it is building attn. And that of course is lebron's beef-- I'm gona give it up every nite and make some stuff happen but if I gona do it hard, and do it in frigging cleveland, u better make sure I get the eyes. So they vie for eyes. Then they play hard, cleveland gets a ring and then they all see lebron split and share some revenue with jay z. And shaq spends his last year in the nba possibly getting a ring... against kobe in the Finals. And the NBA and all the aforementioned dudes get millions upon millions. Shaq and cleveland did not come together due to authentic court play and team needs.
From: Eric Rasco
To: David Rolfe
Cc:
Sent: Thu Nov 19 13:00:04 2009
Subject: Re: read it and weep...
Orlando did it to Lebron. Celts did it to Kobe. Spurs did it to cavs. Detroit and Phoenix and San Antonio etc have done it to la. Hawks did it to wade. And so on. On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Dave Rolfe <drolfe@cpbgroup.com <mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com> > wrote:
But a team can’t catch fire enough such that it spoils kobe or lebron in the Finals.
On 11/19/09 12:50 PM, "Eric Rasco" < <erasco@gmail.com> erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> > wrote:
Not as many early round upsets vs NFL because you have an 82 game season which does a better job of seeding teams and you have playoff series versus flukey single elimination bullshit. Better teams or better matchups or teams catching fire is what wins in almost every sport, longer playoff series usually balance it towards better teams. On 11/19/09 12:57 PM, "Dave Rolfe" <drolfe@cpbgroup.com> wrote:
Because kobe is an attractive african-american male. Smooth, cool, hip, whatevs. Dirk is a caucasian german dude. He’s great for europe, but I still bet you’ll find more basketball-loving germans idolizing kobe than dirk. Let alone how they may idolize in china.
On 11/19/09 12:55 PM, "Daniel Ruth" <danruth@gmail.com> wrote:
why wouldnt stern want the most successful international player to win? wouldn't that drum up more interest overseas? and to your point build international reputation and get more money rolling in. On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Dave Rolfe wrote:
I already point that out. Dirk is not only not a real star he is arguably an anti-star. This point plays right in to my argument. There was an upset— as in, upsets can and do happen, in pro sports— but there was no interest for the nba that year in protecting the mavs. So when there is the formula of marketable star + reg season they earned it, the nba will protect. That year in fact was a perfect year to not protect the number one team— so as to stave off the yo-yo’s conspiracy dudes like me.
(though this also scarily/doubly supports my controlled outcome argument as well: it no secret that stern/nba hates Cuban.) On 11/19/09 12:49 PM, "Daniel Ruth" <danruth@gmail.com> wrote:
what about when it was dirk and mavs time on 07, one of the best records ever. undisputed they were going to the finals but the warriors. the fuckin warriors with zero household name stars, number 8 seed, beat the mavs in 5. it happens. On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Dave Rolfe < <drolfe@cpbgroup.com> drolfe@cpbgroup.com <mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com> > wrote:
I honestly can’t believe you really think that. There is not a chance in all of hell that stern would allow for neither kobe nor lebron in the Finals. Incalculable revenue down the drain. Plus, I know its very difficult to read my shit, but my point is that KOBE EARNED IT BY OUTPERFORMING— HIMSELF— ALL THE OTHERS IN THE REGULAR SEASON. So that’s how it actually becomes tolerable, even if you accept my dim theory of corruption. Stern begs/hopes that kobe plays hard all yr long, and insists that his team does, and they legitimately ascend. Then, in playoffs, he will not let Melo and co flukily take Kobe down. Because that IS possible to do— especially the way Den playing end of last year. But it just won’t happen. At least not last year. And then Kobe gets extremely, extremely rich, due to int’l marketing. So does the NBA. It is not only about “rings.” It is about riches that we can’t imagine.
I guess per my theory on this that for the most part-- though not entirely (for instance Lebron couldn’t pull it off)-- is that per the nba I guess more than any other sports, the regular season is directly tied to the playoffs. That is the league’s brilliance. So many critics hate baseball now because a wild card team can take or make the world series. It is disgusting to them. Why? Because it tarnishes the reg season. Football, same thing. Playoff upsets happen. But you’ll notice that, with stars involved (dirk nowitski, for instance, is not really a star), you won’t see early round upsets in the nba. But they happen every where else. Fact. Why?
On 11/19/09 12:32 PM, "Eric Rasco" < <erasco@gmail.com> erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> < <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> mailto:erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> > > wrote:
Stern didn't steal those inbounds passes from the Nuggets or make melo miss shots after game 1. If the nuggs coulda beaten the lakers they would’ve. On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:16 AM, Dave Rolfe < <drolfe@cpbgroup.com> drolfe@cpbgroup.com <mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com> < <mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com> mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com <mailto:drolfe@cpbgroup.com> > > wrote:
Its about cashing in. Kobe is playing the best— plus he’s a marketing dream. He’s about to slow down, etc. So they do it... now. His global prestige is insane. NBA cashes in on global growth now. No one cares in beijing bout rashard lewis vs chauncey billups. But those teams definitely, definitely could have taken the lakers. Stern just can’t let that happen when a) there’s zillions in global revenue and potential rev at stake, and b) when obviously its not that tough to control anyway, given the Lakes had as good of a team as anyone. But, were the yankies reaaaallly better than even the Cardinals this year? Wasn’t indianapolis just as good as pittsburgh last year in football? It goes on and on. The nba has concluded it can not allow for (afford) natural outcomes. For the most part— and perhaps not every year. But last year was a banner year, internationally, for stern. This confounded by the fact that it is an impure sport anyway because the game HAS to be controlled by refs anyway (so why not do it favorably for the overall success of the game). It is just more of a planned-out state of control. I appreciate your last sentence here hugely. Because my blogging sux (cuz writing short, clear posts is harder for me than musings)... but that— the int’l growth factor— is definitely the entirety of my point. (Along with that either way bball is a controlled game, so what the hell anyway— be who you are, just do it effectively.)
On Nov 19, 2009, at 12:21 PM, David Rolfe wrote: So, yeah, but I don’t agree. I think that business is always about the exploitation of new markets. I think that the NFL indeed pounds the nba domestically. So they eye europe, s. am, and china. And I think that those market opportunities— whether realized or not (and that’s my point— they’re doing all they can to realize it)-- are massive. And far greater in potential than the continued domestic sports market share domination of the nfl. The nfl is enjoying itself right now greatly, but as it fumes over kobe and the olympics, etc. That’s why the nfl is trying to expand themselves. But no one plays football outside of north am. But they play ball. And I feel certain they are balling in beijing.
On 11/19/09 12:26 PM, "Daniel Ruth" <danruth@gmail.com> wrote:
trying to give you some cultural perspective since you are landlocked in the middle of nowhere surrounded by ghosts. i've been to china, these eyes have seen things. don’t you think domestically the popularity of the nba is the lowest its ever been? maybe a notch above those post jordan years. it's not a sport people are re-picking up and getting excited about. your points are influenced by your blog fact that the international community is driving the success of the nba. i just don’t think it's successful.
On 11/19/09 12:01 PM, "Eric Rasco" < <erasco@gmail.com> erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> < <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> mailto:erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> > < <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> mailto:erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> < <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> mailto:erasco@gmail.com <mailto:erasco@gmail.com> > > > wrote:
some good points, but mostly you sound like a crazy guy with aluminum foil on his windows. that's cool too though.
for me, the nba is the best, most watchable sport for me by far, even if the league makes big allowances for it's stars.
but it makes me wonder when stern decided kobe was his guy. maybe it was during the rape trial? or maybe in the playoff-less seasons? or was it when he quit shooting the ball agains the suns in the playoffs to prove a point?
i think business-wise, you (stern) wouldn't have chosen such a dick as the savior of your league, but it's not all a choice, it's just cause kobe is good at basketball and driven and aggressive and got surrounded with a great roster.
or something.
