MSU Red Cedar Message Board

I feel Rome owned Stern. Stern came off as a child. Rome manned up.

I thought so too, especially for someone in Stern's position. Act like an adult and be the bigger person, no matter what the question. To fire back with the wife beater remark is unbelievable. Rome actually did a good job of managing his own (I assume) anger. I would've been pissed.

The problem Stern has is a lot of people think the NBA is rigged, in more ways then just the Lottery. So answering the question the way he did, it showed a total lack of class and avoidance of the issue. He is the COMMISSIONER of the NBA, he isn't an pro athlete, coach etc.. He is supposed to keep his cool and be a level headed business man. The bigger man is supposed to walk away in that situation, or not lower himself to the level he thinks the person insulting hims level is.

And Domestic Abuse is a horrible comparison. IMO a Wife/Women beater is one of, if not the worst thing you can call a man. Say what you want about how you feel about Rome however, Stern comes off worse in this. Rome is a talk show host, Stern in the Commissioner of a Billion Dollar League.

They deserve each other.

You can't bullshit a bullshiter, (write that down). Rome interviews one of the most powerful men in sports and right off the bat, throws out a BS question.

Neither guy comes out of this unscathed. But it's Rome's show - so it's egg on his face.

"Is the draft lottery rigged?"

"No."

The way Rome phrased it was fine, not loaded. I didn't listen to the audio, but Stern came off like a dick in the transcript. If Rome had asked "Have you stopped rigging the lottery?" or "Is the lottery still fixed?" then it would be a loaded question and Stern's logic for going to the wife-beating question would hold. Rome is a dick, and I consider this karma, but Stern was in the wrong here.

David Stern always comes across as a smug, self-satisfied cocksucker. I hate his douchebag face, I hate his douchebag voice, and I hate the douchebag things he says. But he usually doesn't seem stupid, just dickish. Not so here.

Disagree. DP is by far the best interviewer out there in my opinion.

And thats not even taking into context the of the shows as a whole. DP Show >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rome>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CowTurd

Perhaps, "No Jim, that's ridiculous, next question."

War the commissioner of the National Basketball Association, I'm out.

He could have answered it better, but whatever he said wasn't going to satisfy anyone. With an asshat like Rome, I don't blame Stern.

I have certainly no love for either guy here–it's like watching a Nazi and Klan member duke it out–but to me the notion of the Draft Lottery being fixed is played out, even if you actually think it is fixed.

As entertaining and awkward as the audio of their exchange was, I think it's weak justification to simply say you're playing Devil's Advocate. Sure, plenty of people think the draft is fixed, but what exactly did Rome think Stern would say in response? "Oh absolutely, Jim, this is the best job we've done rigging the draft since we gave Washington the first pick when Jordan came back."

Someone here already mentioned that Grantland article where they hit all the usual points, and to some extent Stern began by doing the same thing:

If the Bobcats win, it's Stern doing MJ a favor, if it's NJ winning, it's giving Jay-Z and Brooklyn a running start, if Cleveland wins, it's to give their fans justice for The Decision, and so on…

This article pretty much sums it up:

http://deadspin.com/5914370/no-matter-who-wins-the-nba-draft-lottery-is-fixed?tag=david-stern

Rome said that he felt the question was fair to ask because people wonder about it.

Stern comes back and says: I had a guy at my presser who said he doesnt know anything but believes its fixed and even if every team had a representative there, and 4 media members, and Ernst and Young certified it, he would still think its fixed.

Rome says "I dont think so. The league owns the team, so dont you think that makes the question fair."

Sterns response there was perfect. "No, we are closing this week and that had no effect on the price."

He should have stopped there. Short sweet to the point answers. Dont ramble on about... "Well if Charlotte would have won it, people would have said this. If New Jersey would have won it, people would have said that."

Please don't speculate. If you do back and listen to that interview and pretend Stern stops his response after the first or second sentence when he is done stating facts, he would have come off MUCH better.

Then Stern tries to move on and say "I dont hold it against you, we have been in more contencious (SP?) discussions than that."

Rome wouldn't let it go either.. "I dont know. That ones up there!"

Both parties had a chance to end the conversation and come out looking a lot better, but neither did.

Rome was probably pissed at the "Its never a question I have been asked by a respectable journalist" line...