Golden Nuggets (Links)
Since we're in-between games, here are some links that we thought Nuggets fans might appreciate checking out...
-Yahoo! Sports' Marc Spears (formerly of The Denver Post) writes in length about Nuggets coach George Karl's contract extension situation. According to Spears, Karl turned down a one-year extension over the summer.
-SI.com's Arash Markazi writes about Karl, Roy Williams and the Nuggets organization's affection for rookie Ty Lawson.
-ESPN.com's TrueHoop takes an in-depth look into former NBA referee Tim Donaghy's various claims and attempts to debunk many of them, notably current NBA referee Joey Crawford's alleged preferential treatment towards former Nugget Allen Iverson.
-CBSSports.com's Ken Berger (who wrote a nice piece the other day on Donaghy's allegations in regards to the Allen Iverson/Utah game discussed on "60 Minutes") serves up commentary on A.I. passing over a contender to go back to the lowly 76ers.
-BasetBawful takes a shot at the Nuggets record, claiming we've had an easy schedule thus far.
18 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ken Berger is full of shit
He obviously doesn’t watch much ball. The fucking free throw arguement is so old. Nugs shoot more free throws than anyone because the get to the bucket more than anyone. The Nugs play to the bucket a deserve a ton more calls than other teams. The unfairness would have shown up in the calls against Allen and the palming violations. Plus he probably wasn’t looking at guys holding Iverson on the perimeter or setting illegal picks. Nice try douche bag Berger.
It is comical to me
That these fucking writers keep trying to discredit Donaghy. Couldn’t the dude be sued for slander if he is lying? Why won’t the NBA do this? Because it will draw more attention to the subject and that is the last thing they want. They would have him making public the directives from the NBA to nudge games, lol. So gay yet comical.
actually no
I don’t think libel (written defamation) is attributable when discussing public figures.
could be wrong though.
by InboundingLobPass on Dec 9, 2009 3:49 PM MST up reply actions
He is writing and saying things
But I am pretty sure a guy can’t go around calling a corporation corrupt without any boundaries.
It is attributable if there is provable malice
From the excerpts that have surfaced and from the interviews he has done, Donaghy is a prime target for libel and slander. Dick Bavetta and Steve Javvie both have a case but only if they can prove intent and malice.
Practice doesn't make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
by Big Mickey D on Dec 10, 2009 1:49 PM MST up reply actions
I've said it before (and should probably just give up):
Just like Conseco and his book, Donaghy has nothing to gain and everything to lose by lying. It’s when no one would step up to the plate (pun intended) and try and litigate any sort of defamation of character tort with Conseco that congress took note and began investigating. Do you remember how it started that Conseco was just nuts and jealous and a liar and by the end of it every single one of his claims was substantiated by an independant investigator? There’s no way Donaghy is smart enough to skirt the truth discreetly enough to keep his ass out of civil court. I believe him because the risks associated with lying (including getting executed by the mob!) are far too great.
Practice doesn't make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.
by Big Mickey D on Dec 10, 2009 1:58 PM MST up reply actions
Birdman on the Radio
Birdman Anderson is coming on ESPN Radio 1600 in Denver today. 8 AM MT (10 AM ET) For those not in Denver, the show streams live at www.vicandgary.com
The SA - Denver game that Donaghy claimed was fixed (noted in Post the other day). . .
Was the last game of the season. . .pull up the box score and you will notice a few things:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200404140SAS.html
1) Denver was ahead at the end of the 1st quarter and the first half
2) The starters all played 27 min or less; Doleac, Skeeta, and Bowen all played more than 20 minutes; Mark Pope played 11 minutes. Think they might foul much? You’d be right – those players got 15 fouls and Elson picked up 6. Could that have been bcs Duncan and Parker get a lot of calls against slower, less skilled players? Melo only had 1 foul.
3) Marcus Camby sat out the game after playing an average of 40 minutes a game over the previous four
I don’t remember watching the game but it sure looks like one team didn’t care.
Donaghy has a vested interest to make his claims more exciting. . .I am not saying it is impossible but when you try and fact check, it doesn’t tend to support him.
The problem with Donaghy is that he was doing better than he should have on games that he didn’t officiate. You don’t think organized crime got involved because his information was worthless do you?
One of the interesting things that you get if you read between the lines of what Donaghy has said is that (excepting Dick Bavetta) the refs generally had it in for players, not teams. They didn’t seem to care about the outcome of the game as long as they were able to put down or prop up a player. They might refuse to call it when the player they hate is fouled, but don’t seem to mind if that player’s team wins even though that player’s teams chances of winning have been affected by the calls.
Also keep in mind that Donaghy was betting the spread (which seems pretty silly to do in the NBA on the face of it). He probably had a lot of bets where he figured the favorite would win, but wouldn’t cover the spread and won a lot that way. Officials affecting the spread could be done in a very subtle way. The only way you can fact check Donaghy is to know which bets he made and they don’t know that.
"Woohoo Denver, Yeah... All right Denver justify my love!" ...Homer Simpson
Funny that Basketbawful doesn't mention the Lakers incredibly easy schedule so far either.
17 of 21 games to start at home, my god, the horrors the Lakers have had to face
Swats.
No one ever mentions that little tidbit when claiming the Lakers have the best record.
The good thing, I guess, is that those road games will be coming around at some point this season and hopefully towards the end. Let’s see if that conference best win record holds up at the end of the season with a bunch of road games just before the playoffs. (insert evil laugh here)
by Joelsopinion on Dec 10, 2009 10:03 AM MST up reply actions
About the Truehoop article
The writer (name?) constantly uses box scores and FTA/% to disprove Donaghy’s claims. This is pointless. The things that affect the outcome of games won’t show up on a stat line. It’s the no calls or the gray area calls made that have the most affect. I also like how he uses only a handful of examples of blowout games to exonerate Bavetta in Donaghy’s claims. Of course there will be discrepencies when you state Bavetta likes to keep games close, because he didn’t say Bavetta ALWAYS keeps games close. I’m sure Stern paid a pretty penny for that article to be penned.
Donaghy . .
The problem with Donaghy is he is a liar. You can’t take anything he says at face value. So we are left to examine his claims to see if evidence supports them.
I thought the Bevatta stuff was pretty convincing. The sample size seemed large enough to show that Bevatta did not in fact make games closer systematically. If you are betting the % of him in those case, you lose. Donaghy claimed that he bet the underdog when Bavetta reffed big underdogs . . if he was successful on the strategy he was using something other than that rule.
As far as organized crime getting and advantage from his information. Undoubtably. Injury reports, ref assignments would certainly have value to bettors. Even if the refs aren’t intentially altering outcomes, I am sure they all have tendencies that could be teased out with enough data.
BUT, what is more likely, a liar ref who was vested interest in implicating others telling the truth that other ref fixed games but he didn’t or just betting on the games he could control? What would be an easier way for the mob to win, paying a ref to fix games or relying on his “information.” I am not saying everything he says in BS, but I am saying some independant vertification would be required before I give him much credence.
Why is he a liar?
Didn’t the NBA do an extensive background check on the dude before they hired him? Did the dude lie when he was betting on games? We don’t know… Do you have any evidence that he has ever lied? Just because he bet on games does not mean he is a liar! Is he a cheater? Maybe, but he says he didn’t cheat either. He says he cheated because his bosses told him to…
Do you call a guy a cheater because his boss gave him an order to cheat?
Maybe, but that is somewhat gray.
Pretty sure the NBA has a strict policy and code ethics about gambling . .
You can’t be a ref in the NBA and gamble and not have lied.
I admit I haven’t followed it closely (i.e. read his book or the FBI report), but all I am saying is that it is pretty easy to make claims about other people integrity (particulary when you have none left) and claim “I never fixed games.” Everything I have heard about the entire affair is that if FBI / NBA had the actually records of his bets they could at least check on them.
I know Cuban has done a lot of work on tracking reffing and if he could have found some systematic problems in the data, I am sure the NBA would know about (’course there is no reason we would have heard about).
The snippets I have heard of his claims don’t really check out . .that’s all I am saying. Doesn’t mean it isn’t true, but a convicted felon should have some proof before we all start hailing him.
Yes, he does have vested interest . .not in getting caught, but in the tell all story. Sure does sell more books to make more exciting than I “I was idiot” plotline.















