NBA Off Topic

[Scott812313]

Re: NBA Off Topic

I've always been of the mindset that Big Ben was the main antagonist in the brawl. He was storming around acting ridiculous after Artest fouled him, but Ben had been hammering people the whole game before that and then when it was dying down he threw the towel or wristband at Artest. I really think Artest was trying to diffuse the situation by laying on the scorer's table when the most miraculous cup toss ever rained in on him. I still can't believe how perfectly it fluttered down, right in his face hahaha. Anyone who says they wouldn't be royally pissed being in Ron's shoes that night is lying.

[The Big Squeezy]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Can someone please hook me up with that JR Smith three-asauras celebration .gif? Thanks.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Off Topic

[The Big Squeezy]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Thanks Pack.

[bigeastbumrush]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Ayyy-yo.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S1p7g_N4NPg?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S1p7g_N4NPg?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Dude didn't even react though.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Off Topic

LOL @ his reaction from the :07-:09 mark.

[Boltman]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Wow, that whole Mutombo gold thing? Here's a detailed report

http://m.deadspin.com/5889660/dikembe-mutombo-and-the-case-of-the-missing-congolese-gold

Check them powerpoint slides, nice approach.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

From that Deadspin link (and I do go there often so I don't know how I overlooked this) I read a couple of stories, one was of a statistician who cooked the books with stats or lack thereof.

The other was actually not much of a story but it left me bewildered, very NSFW anime drawings of Jeremy Lin and some cheerleaders lmao.

wow...

The things some people draw lol.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Damn dudes went through the whole topic like it was 2004 again. I see where guys are coming from with it, but you can't just look at things in black and white terms and say 'you don't go into the stands' and that's the end of it without context. I take you back to Antonio Davis. Some clowns were going after his wife in the stands, he saw it and went up there in the middle of a game. At what point is it okay or understandable at least to be human being? If I'm a player in the league and my grandmother or grandfather, mother or kids are in the stands watching me and some jackass bought a ticket and feels that gives him the right to do whatever he wants and he starts putting his hands on them or something, I'm supposed to just chill on the court hoping security is doing they're jobs because 'you don't go into the stands?'

[Boltman]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Your family being attacked in the stands and having a drink thrown at you from the crowd are two very different scenarios.

Since we were talking about the malice in the palace I'll stick with that scenario, Ron Ron absolutely is not to go into the crowd and confront a guy for throwing a drink at him (who ironically was the wrong guy he accosted).

[Drewski]

Re: NBA Off Topic

/shrug.

Don't think it was right for Artest to go into the stands under that circumstance. Him getting a beer chucked at him isn't equivalent to his family being attacked by a random fan, can't really compare apples to oranges.

He got hit by a beer, it ends there. He was far from being in "serious" danger at that point.

It's cool I guess. He got his suspension and lost $7 mill, someone thought he was wrong.

[SidVish]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Barkley's great.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/charles-barkley-just-shoot-20-percent-nba-fans-222608081.html

Charles Barkley's comments regarding whether or not 20 percent of NBA fans should be shot comes down to whether or not you think 20 percent of people should be taken "out back" (as Chuck puts it) and taken care of in the manner Charles suggests. You don't have to be an Illuminati to seethe at 20 percent of the people you encounter between the time you leave the house and the time you come back to it with half a tank full of gas and two grocery bags filled with eggs, turkey, dry cat food, a libation of some sort, and a bag of cilantro that YOU JUST KNOW IS GOING TO BE PAST EXPIRATION BY TOMORROW.

It all comes down to anger management, based on how many people you come into contact with during the course of the day. That doesn't just mean the kid that doesn't signal before turning right onto the street you're turning left out of, or the jerk that probably didn't listen to your mix CD, or the guy on the radio (host, caller; it often doesn't matter) that thinks Stephen Curry can be had for Jameer Nelson and "I don't know, a first-round pick." You can stay indoors all day, taking in website comments and tweets and Facebook missives and want 20 percent lopped off of any medium (right down to the album or podcast you're listening to) and not be wrong.

Though Charles, on the radio with Jim Rome on Wednesday, was probably wrong when he said 20 percent of NBA fans should be taken out. We think. Definitely. Here's his quote, via CBS Sports:

"Fans man. They love their team and their player. They don't want to hear any criticisms. They just want you to be 100 percent for their team period. I think it's only a small faction. I think 80 percent are great. Twenty percent, I wish you could take them out back and just shoot them.

"No. I meant that, Jim. Eighty percent of the fans are fantastic. But 20 percent of them are so mean-spirited and say the most nasty things to you, because they know you can't grab them."

Barkley, as a player, had to deal with this in nearly 30 other NBA stadiums a year as an NBA player, hearing invective from fans in every city but his own. Or even the cities he used to call his own. Or even cities he currently called "his own," after a few missed free throws.

And, as a full-time TNT analyst since the 2000-01 season, Barkley has no doubt gotten the same flack anyone who is lucky enough to comment on professional sports has gotten. Any bit of opinion about a certain team has to be bias at best and wrong at worst. You can talk up just about every facet of a certain squad, tossing out sincere compliments left and right, but if you get one tiny facet wrong (or, something positive that still flies in the face of a fandom's collective opinion) you're a bum. It is part of what we have to deal with, again, as people who are lucky enough to comment on these sorts of things for a living.

(Even if Chuck's living is more well-heeled than most.)

Even at the top of the mountain, though, the slings and arrows still hurt. And though Barkley isn't on Twitter or posting on websites or even taking calls on TNT or his various radio interviews, criticism will still get back to him, and it will still hurt. And anyone who's ever been hurt by someone else wants to … OK, maybe not shoot someone. But close.

Twenty percent of NBA fans shouldn't be shot. That's pretty safe to point out. Hopefully, soon, Barkley will realize this (he either pretended not to be or professed not to be speaking with tongue placed firmly in cheek during his interview with Rome). But perhaps 20 percent of NBA fans should take a step back and consider that valid opinions can come from sources that are, on the surface, merely disagreeing with them without the influence of bias on a subject that they care about very deeply.

Not that this hits home, or anything.

[ex carrabba fan]

Re: NBA Off Topic

It seems really simple that a cup of beer doesn't equal going into the stands, I do admit it, but I'm really saying have a cup of beer thrown at you unexpected and see how you react.

That's all. It's just one of those things.

And that's not even factoring in that he was just involved in an altercation with Ben Wallace.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: NBA Off Topic

Your family being attacked in the stands and having a drink thrown at you from the crowd are two very different scenarios.

Since we were talking about the malice in the palace I'll stick with that scenario, Ron Ron absolutely is not to go into the crowd and confront a guy for throwing a drink at him (who ironically was the wrong guy he accosted).

Not really saying they're the same thing, but just arguing against this mantra of 'you don't go into the stands' as this black and white issue as it was made. Do the rules say not to go into the stands unless you feel your family is in danger? Probably not, I'm sure it says under no circumstances do you go into the stands. Considering Davis got suspended 5 games for what he did, that tells us there's no exceptions. So why is Ron villafied to this day for losing his cool when someone hit him in the face with a cup of beer and yet Antonio Davis will largely be forgotten for what he did when he felt his wife was threatened? So you have to robotically process and divide your emotions and reactions?

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Off Topic

He got hit by a beer, it ends there. He was far from being in "serious" danger at that point.

If only things were this simple in the real world...

[23]

It seems really simple that a cup of beer doesn't equal going into the stands, I do admit it, but I'm really saying have a cup of beer thrown at you unexpected and see how you react.

That's all. It's just one of those things.

And that's not even factoring in that he was just involved in an altercation with Ben Wallace.

More like he was about to die at the hands of ben wallace

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk