Tim Donaghy Book Excerpts
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 30, 2009 12:50 PM CDT
59 comments
Deadspin has it. The stuff on Dick Bavetta is pretty hard-core.
1 recs |
59 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
This is perhaps the #1 reason I hate basketball
You would think that the NBA would love a guy who plays such great defense. Think again! Star stoppers hurt the promotion of marquee players. Fans don’t pay high prices to see players like Raja Bell — they pay to see superstars like Kobe Bryant score 40 points. Basketball purists like to see good defense, but the NBA wants the big names to score big points.
If a player of Kobe’s stature collides with the likes of Raja Bell, the call will almost always go for Kobe and against Bell. As part of our ongoing training and game preparation, NBA referees regularly receive game-action video tape from the league office. Over the years, I have reviewed many recorded hours of video involving Raja Bell. The footage I analyzed usually illustrated fouls being called against Bell, rarely for him. The message was subtle but clear — call fouls against the star stopper because he’s hurting the game.
As an NBA hater, this book is just too easy, so I’m going to choose to relish in it (even though I know the source is about as reliable as Jose Canseco… wait….
Go Rice Owls!
by JBImaknee on Oct 30, 2009 1:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My first thought when I started reading it
was Jose Canseco.
|Space for Rent|
by RangerMad on Oct 30, 2009 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same here
And its a good comparison. There is probably some exaggerations in this book, but people are going to try saying its all made up only to find out more and more of it is true and that in reality, they just chose to not believe what was really going on.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 30, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Raise your hand if you still think that the NBA doesn't fix games
Looks like all this book will do is confirm everything people have been saying for years about how the NBA has their officials fix games to fit their own desires. I feel bad for the NBA players actually. These guys are the elite athletes in their sport and they are forced to play a WWE version of basketball.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 30, 2009 1:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be surprised
if players or officials occasionally tried to fix games. I’d be very surprised if Stern is sitting in his office, coordinating a fix of a series or playoffs. Its one thing for an official to risk his career, its another for a league to risk Billions.
"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland
by DJCahill on Oct 30, 2009 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A lot of that
doesn’t come across as very credible. Aside from the obvious suspicions one might have about Donaghy’s motivations, the accounts just don’t sound realistic. Maybe the substance of some of those claims is accurate, but I think his accounts are probably exaggerated.
Perhaps I am being naive, but it’s hard to imagine groups of adults who have risen to elite status in their chosen profession giddily jeopardizing their careers over $20 or $50 bets.
I’m also weary of the ad hominem nature of the excerpts. It seems like Donaghy’s approach was to concoct personality quirks for individual refs that he has gripes with, sometimes drawing on popular conception of those refs but in a much exaggerated form. This is a great strategy for generating public controversy for his book, but it seems implausible to have a band of such colorful and professional unethical cowboys running amuck with the integrity of the league while the league front office stands idly by.
I’m not saying there isn’t some truth in the book, but I doubt that all the wild claims are true and that the ones that are havent been subject to hyperbole. Maybe this attention will spur the league to shore up some of the officiating issues that really do need to be examined and create a fairer competitive environment, but who knows.
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Oct 30, 2009 1:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why is it so hard to believe?
This is the kind of thing people have been seeing for years with NBA officiating. The star treatment, the extremely questionable calls that made games more interesting, the way that some refs seem to have it in for players and teams. What makes more sense? That an NBA referee consistently misses calls that high school refs see with ease or that an NBA referee chooses to not make the call for one reason or another.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 30, 2009 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While there might be some biased officiating going on,
Im much more inclined to see it as an individual deviation than a grand conspiracy on the part of the league. The conception of gross incompetence and favoritism on the part of NBA officials seems guided by the same sort of “eye test” evidence that makes a casual observer think Michael Young is a Gold Glove-caliber shortstop. This is going to be amplified by the fact that determining what is an NBA foul is anything but an exact science. In slow-motion reveiws of tape, one can probably get pretty accurate, but with the pace of the game all one can really hope for in real-time is a reasonably fair approximation.
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Oct 30, 2009 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
BS
The eye test works pretty well when you see someone getting blatantly fouled but no call because you can’t call an offensive foul on Kobe, Wade, or any star player. I’m sure there are a lot more non-calls or poor calls that go unnoticed, but most of the complaints come from the clear, “I can’t believe that happened” kind of calls.
And your hope for a reasonable fair approximation is probably pretty skewed by seeing horrible officiating for the past 20 years in the NBA.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 30, 2009 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's amazing to me
How the “eye test” fits in perfectly with preconceived notions.
by brettgardner on Oct 30, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, but..
Wouldn’t that also be true regarding what NBA referees (who are human after all) see? It’s not the least bit difficult to beleive that a lot of NBA calls are the result of confirmation bias.
That being said, I’m sure a lot of the stories are WAY overblown, but it is interesting that the NBA has already banned the tipping of ball boys by referees.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
by bking on Oct 30, 2009 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree about confirmation bias clouding referees judgement. It’s similar to how Chris Davis can get a called strike three against him, if the pitch is 6 inches outside, when the pitcher is known for control and Davis is known for…striking out.
Even with their training and striving for objectivity, Im sure some of their biases leak out during the course of a game, but whether that rises to the level of conscious discrimination has hardly yet to be established.
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Oct 30, 2009 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, it's not proven...
But it is incredibly sad that it’s so plausible. Every bit of this could be BS, and every bit of it could be true. Sad but true.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
by bking on Oct 30, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’m more of the mind that his claims are possible, but not plausible. I won’t rule them out, and it’d be quite distressing if they were somehow proven true. But I find it more likely that the book is mostly fabrications.
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Oct 30, 2009 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point about the eye test
is that it may tell you what happens in a specific instance but it’s not enough to draw valid conclusions about general tendencies. You might see Mike Young make three great plays in one night. It may stoke your idea that he is a wizard at short, but it does not accurately depict the nuance of his defensive abilities over the long haul.
It’s very easy to get the idea that the refs are out to prop up stars at the expense of hard-working lunchpail guys like Raja Bell, but without a rigorous statistical evaluation you are just falling into the same fallacies that plagued baseball analysis for the last century or so. Bad calls and bad no-calls will happen, but casual observation of them isn’t enough to affirm a league-wide officiating conspiracy.
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Oct 30, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
x
If he had been doing a bet whereby they called no fouls until 3:00 left in the first quarter, he should name the game and the date. Let people go back and look at the video. Stuff like that leads me to believe he’s not really being truthful.
by FuturePants on Oct 30, 2009 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not hard for me to beleive...
How many colorful anecdotes from your past do you recall the dates for?
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
by bking on Oct 30, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
Canseco claimed Boone admitted to steroids during a ST game and Boone did X during the game. Research showed that game didn’t exist. Didn’t change the fact that Canseco was more right than wrong.
It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. You count on it, rely on it to buffer the passage of time, to keep the memory of sunshine and high skies alive, and then just when the days are all twilight, when you need it most, it stops.
by WyoRanger on Oct 30, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WOW
if any of that is true, the NBA is going to see a gigantic firestorm
JD’s like, "you want some fucking pitching? Here’s all the pitching you can stand. Now choke on it, bitches!"- RCCook
by laxtonto on Oct 30, 2009 1:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'll hold off on judgment until some intrepid reporter vets these claims.
That’s explosive stuff, but much of it is unproveable and plays right into the stereotypical conspiracy theorist mindset. He blatantly contradicts himself with Bavetta:
The real reason I picked the losing team was that I was just about certain they would cover the spread, no matter how badly they played…From my earliest involvement with Bavetta, I learned that he likes to keep games close, and that when a team gets down by double-digit points, he helps the players save face.
and then…
In a twist of fate, it was the Spurs that ended up needing the win to have a shot at the division title, and Bavetta generously accommodated….San Antonio blew Denver out of the building that evening, winning by 26 points.
Again, it’s music to the conspiracy theorists’ ears to the point of playing both sides of an argument. Mix in some proof and I’ll listen more closely.
by 3hacks on Oct 30, 2009 1:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The first quote is a general statement
and the second one a specific game. This book is going to be analyzed and dissected. Someone will go back and look at Bevetta’s games and see how the point differential compares to the NBA average.
|Space for Rent|
by RangerMad on Oct 30, 2009 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's all impossible to prove or disprove,
But I know that the NBA has had a lot less appeal to me than other sports because of the bad officiating. Just compare the officiating in the NBA with the officiating in college basketball, or the NFL. There is so much less controversy in the latter two. I hate watching a game when a team gets hosed by bad calls, even when my team is the beneficiary. It sours me on the sport after a while. That’s why I hope MLB does something about it and institutes replay.
And as an aside, I’ve heard a lot of people say that MLB should stay away from mechanizing ball-strike calls, but I disagree. The technology is such that there could be a red light/green light indication about a second after the pitch. Bet that would do almost as much more for parity in the league as a salary cap. Wouldn’t it be nice if Derek Holland got the same calls as Andy Pettitte?
by jcAustin on Nov 4, 2009 10:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Mavs Moneyball has a take on this
here. They bring up some good points and info. If the betting on who tips the ball boy wasn’t an issue, then why did the NBA outlaw tips to ball boys/locker room attendants?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Oct 30, 2009 1:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
interesting
NBA fans seem to expect bad officiating or at least some questionable calls. Are we at that point with the MLB umpiring?
|Space for Rent|
by RangerMad on Oct 30, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you're implying fixing of games by umpires
No. Baseball and basketball (and football for that matter) are very different as far as officiating. Baseball doesn’t have any gray area except for the strikezone and maybe interference calls. Everything else can be called absolutely correct. In football and basketball the question is often how much contact is too much, was the foul intentional, was their a receiver in the area of the throw, etc. etc.
It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. You count on it, rely on it to buffer the passage of time, to keep the memory of sunshine and high skies alive, and then just when the days are all twilight, when you need it most, it stops.
by WyoRanger on Oct 30, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everything else can be called absolutely correct.
Watched the playoffs this year?
by oc on Oct 31, 2009 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
There are plenty of reasons to distrust Donaghy
But It’s not like this stuff is beyond belief; not by a long shot.
I like steak.
by Conjunction on Oct 30, 2009 1:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm dubious of a lot of his claims, but..
Everyone was sure Canseco was full of it at first too. I think I’ll reserve judgement and keep an open mind for a while. It’s all quite plausible, but mostly unverifiable.
The Texas Rangers have been synonymous with explosive firepower ever since they emptied 130 rounds into Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow in 1934. - Alyssa Milano
by bking on Oct 30, 2009 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
pretty damning stuff. You have to take it with a grain of salt of course, but even if a quarter of it’s true it’s terrible for the NBA.
by bdavison94 on Oct 30, 2009 1:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Random House
cancelled publication.
“After a close legal review of the final manuscript of Blowing the Whistle by Tim Donaghy, and our independent evaluation of some of the author’s sources and statements, Triumph Books and Random House have decided not to go forward with the book’s publication. Our decision is wholly our own and was made without consultation with any outside parties or individuals,” Random House spokesman Stuart Applebaum said in a statement.
Are they afraid of the NBA?
|Space for Rent|
by RangerMad on Oct 30, 2009 1:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This book shouldn't be an eye opener
If you’ve watched any NBA game in the past 10 years it should be completely obvious that fouls are rarely called against superstars. You’re naive if you think that the game is called both ways still.
"Clearly, the season is over. Fire Daniels, fire Washington, fire Maddux, burn down TBIA." - AJM
by aggierangerfan00 on Oct 30, 2009 3:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
And I believe this all comes from David Stern
and nothing to do with miniscule gambling. Stern realizes the strength of the game is the superstars and no one is going to watch if Kobe has 3 fouls in the first half and has to sit more than half of the game.
"Clearly, the season is over. Fire Daniels, fire Washington, fire Maddux, burn down TBIA." - AJM
by aggierangerfan00 on Oct 30, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's something that could be verified:
As part of our ongoing training and game preparation, NBA referees regularly receive game-action video tape from the league office. Over the years, I have reviewed many recorded hours of video involving Raja Bell. The footage I analyzed usually illustrated fouls being called against Bell, rarely for him. The message was subtle but clear — call fouls against the star stopper because he’s hurting the game.
Do those tapes still exist and does it illustrate what he claims? It’s still a subjective determination but it’s something.
It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. You count on it, rely on it to buffer the passage of time, to keep the memory of sunshine and high skies alive, and then just when the days are all twilight, when you need it most, it stops.
by WyoRanger on Oct 30, 2009 4:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Spurs/Nuggets game Donaghy refers to
53 FTA for the Spurs, 18 for the Nuggets.
Nuggets were up 33-32 at the half. Be interesting to see how foul calls changed in the second half.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 30, 2009 4:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Here’s the recap.
“Bad first half, great second half, playoffs start Saturday,” summed Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, whose third-seeded team hosts No. 6 Memphis in the opener.
San Antonio, trailing by a point at the break, doubled its first-half total by scoring 32 points in the third quarter while holding the Nuggets to 5-for-19 shooting for 16 points in the period. Denver scored only 34 points in the final two quarters.
“In the third we came out really aggressive and I thought our defense stepped up,” Tim Duncan said. “Things seemed to go well after that.”
Duncan had 23 points and 16 rebounds for the Spurs, and Tony Parker had all 11 of his points in the third, nine of them from the line.
The Spurs led by as many as 28 points in the fourth quarter.
Denver coach Jeff Bzdelik said his team was pushed around the court by San Antonio and that he hopes the players learned from that.
“They had 53 free-throw attempts and I felt a lot of those were a result of our defensive mistakes,” he said. “I think that’s where our guys have to understand the physicality that’s going to happen in the playoffs.”
I didn't know what a mancrush was. Derek Holland showed me.
by DerekSTheRed on Oct 30, 2009 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That line about Tony Parker is really damning.
I didn't know what a mancrush was. Derek Holland showed me.
by DerekSTheRed on Oct 30, 2009 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some more data
Iverson was fined $25K after bitching about Javie, and Donaghy says the refs screwed Iverson after that.
The fine was announced on 1/5, it appears.
On 1/8, Iverson shot 4 FTs, tying for his lowest total of the season.
His next game, 1/10, he shot 3 FTs.
The next game, 7.
He then had a string of 3 games with at least 10 FTs, and then it went:
5
6
15
5
12
5
4
Iverson averaged about 9 1/2 FTs per game that season.
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 30, 2009 5:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This could the best thing to happen to the NBA in a while
by tyd3311 on Oct 30, 2009 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, for the NBA viewer, at least
Because you know refs will be calling everything as straight as possible right now
by tyd3311 on Oct 30, 2009 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
someone's going to ask iverson about this
i wonder if he’ll confirm it. not that his confirmation means much but still…
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
by ab03 on Oct 31, 2009 12:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so no mention of the mavs
but they talk about how much they hate the suns because of robert sarver. well, unless mark cuban is buying the jags behind the scenes, they must HATE the mavericks.
I would still like to think that the mavericks had a chance at winning the heat series (dirk did miss some FT’s at the end of game 5) and the GS series were just badly coached so I still don’t believe we got screwed. But…
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
by ab03 on Oct 31, 2009 12:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
BTW
unions suck
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
by ab03 on Oct 31, 2009 12:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One reason I can believe Donaghy
is that the union prevents real discipline and accountability of the referees. The same is true in baseball. It breeds arrogance among the refs.
|Space for Rent|
by RangerMad on Oct 31, 2009 8:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could not possibly agree more.
I HATE unions. I could see how they served a good role at one point, but I hate them now. If you want to read something really eye-opening, check this out:
The New Yorker on the New York Teacher’s Union
Simply incredible. UAW has nothing on these guys…
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Oct 31, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to disagree
I don’t want to thread hijack, but unions gave us the minimum wage, employer based health care (mixed results I know), forty hour work week, overtime pay, pensions, vacation time and sick leave. Now that the unions are losing their power, I’ve started to see some of these things go away.
I work for one of the largest employers in Fort Worth, and they have taken away pensions for new employees, stopped paying for overtime of any non-union member and only offer one choice of a health plan next year. Of course any time the union wins a concession, the bosses offer it to us non-union guys so people will be less inclined to join the union. If the union wasn’t there in the first place though, we wouldn’t be getting anything.
I didn't know what a mancrush was. Derek Holland showed me.
by DerekSTheRed on Oct 31, 2009 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree somewhat
Unions may be known for corruption and cronyism and for their ability to hold certain industries hostage, but to judge their real effect it’s not enough just to look at how things are with unions. you have to compare that to how things would be without them. Their presence probably does a good deal to preserve the equilibrium of power between firms and employees.
i do think the traditional way that unions have worked may be becoming antiquated with changes in the labor force. People do have and need to have greater occupational mobility now more than ever. And firms probably need greater flexibility with regards to hiring and firing too. I’m not sure what this should all mean, but I think some smart reform to the unions that doesnt totally weaken their power might be good.
by Smoakin in the Boys Room on Oct 31, 2009 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah that's reasonable
It’s unfortunate that our government’s power structure is such that no reform can take place thanks to the two party system. You’re either for unions or against them and there’s no place for those in the middle.
I didn't know what a mancrush was. Derek Holland showed me.
by DerekSTheRed on Oct 31, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats more because of powerful lobbyists than a 2 party system
A 3rd party would be in the pocket just as much as the main 2.
by UNTJosh on Nov 3, 2009 12:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One has to ask, though...
…how much blame goes to the unions, and how much goes to the administrations who decide it is easier to accede to their demands than fight them?
by Adam J. Morris on Oct 31, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
From my understanding...
..this is the result of fighting them. The teacher’s union goes into every negotiation trying to get it undone.
I think it was the Wall St Journal that had an interesting point that the ‘elite news media’ that used to bash charter schools and opponents of the public schools/teachers unions are now turning on the unions. More specifically, they seem to support the education reformers who call for more drastic change, such as the KIPP programs and those that Obama is surrounding himself with.
Responding to the earlier comments, I should be more specific, I hate unions who have grown accustomed to having so much power that they have a large sense of entitlement. That New Yorker article had some prime examples of it as the interviews with teachers seemed to be some of the worst stuff PR-wise. I agree that unions have played a very important role in US history, but it seems like they are often doing more harm then good in more recent times. Basically, I disagree with the idea that the point of a company is to hire/maintain/care for its employees. It’s one of it’s jobs, but not it’s goal.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Nov 1, 2009 2:51 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
your last point is the reason you need a union
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
by ab03 on Nov 2, 2009 8:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
my union comment was a bit misplaced
i specifically hate the referee union but even then I’m not sure there is a better alternative.
These refs are kind of screwed without a union – there is really only one league in the U.S. so unless the CBA (which may have recently folded) suddenly decides to spend on refs, those refs would just have to take whatever the NBA offered them. The free market doesn’t work great when there is a monopoly. I guess there’s a perception that where the refs can so easily be replaced that maybe they could stand for a wage decrease and I can’t necessarily argue that. If some other guy is willing to spend 30 weeks on the road for peanuts, so be it. But you also get the feeling that without a union, the NBA probably would underpay refs by a lot.
But this union is the reason we have 85 year old cronies still reffing games. There is no reason that Dick Bavetta should still have a job. He’s not good at it and, where there is a need for impartiality, he’s about the least impartial person there is. If you want to fire any of these people, you need to go through a shit load of red tape. And if you want to enact changes, you need to threaten a lockout.
You just can’t separate the good from the bad.
"I just want to comment on how it’s become like a common thing in the [MLB] for guys to fall in love with [the Rangers’s] sloppy seconds." (thanks cstorm)
by ab03 on Nov 2, 2009 8:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
If Brad Pitt is playing Beane who do you want playing you?
JD: Eddie Guardado.
by GhettoBear04 on Nov 2, 2009 9:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
