vball10set;424430 wrote:I didn't realize Bryant Gumbel was a Cavs fan...
Lol, exactly what i was thinking.
vball10set;424430 wrote:I didn't realize Bryant Gumbel was a Cavs fan...
jordo212000;424702 wrote:Even if the NBA wanted to stop this so-called "collusion" from happening again, they couldn't. The only way they could is if Stern had all of the players' cell phones tapped and had a tracking device implanted into their bodies. (I wouldn't be surprised if Stern is somewhere trying to figure out how to tap cell phones. The dude is a twerp).
ytownfootball;424695 wrote:I think it is pretty apparent that there indeed was collusion among the three to end up in Miami. Though, hindsight is obviously 20/20. The three year deals they signed all points to there being a similar mindset. I think it was Cuban who brought up the fact that it was going to be brought up in the owners talks, which I would be very interested to be a fly on the wall for those discussions, but I really believe they're going to not do anything. The whole issue of actually PROVING there was collusion is what will prevent them from doing anything actually, not that they nor the fans would want to stop it. The actual mechanisms that would need be in place to stop any of it would rival that of J. Edgar Hoovers attempts at proving communist tendencies...that won't, and can't, imo happen. That's why I say it is what it is, it won't change, still don't mean I have to like it.
enigmaax;424722 wrote:There is no such thing as "collusion" amongst players, in the legal sense as defined by the labor agreement - right or wrong?
enigmaax;424722 wrote:I'm asking because I really don't know, not trying to argue anything. Isn't "collusion" something specifically called out in the labor agreement? But doesn't it only apply to team reps and players interacting? There is no such thing as "collusion" amongst players, in the legal sense as defined by the labor agreement - right or wrong?
I believe that it was reported that AT LEAST 5 owners complained to the commissioner about possible tampering and collusion. That the NBA chose not to pursue the issue does not mean that there was no evidence or that this type of behavior is okay.It means only that they had a reason not to push it. Gee, Can you imagine what that possibly might be?Like the entire rest of the NBA, who found no reason to push that issue?
HitsRus;424787 wrote:I believe that it was reported that AT LEAST 5 owners complained to the commissioner about possible tampering and collusion. That the NBA chose not to pursue the issue does not mean that there was no evidence or that this type of behavior is okay.It means only that they had a reason not to push it. Gee, Can you imagine what that possibly might be?
Holy shit Hits. The Mises Institute? Pretty soon you'll turn into a full blown libertarian like me. LOL.HitsRus;424892 wrote:http://blog.mises.org/12822/nba-star-explains-the-economics-of-collusion/
I think it is pretty obvious that Pat Riley had intimate knowledge( thru Nick Arison) of what the three stars were plotting. He used that knowledge to position his franchise to do precisely what was necessary to bring it about. He knew exactly what these guys wanted and what buttons to push.
HitsRus;424892 wrote:http://blog.mises.org/12822/nba-star-explains-the-economics-of-collusion/