The Chat House
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
|
Monday, August 20, 2007; 1:15 PM
Welcome to another edition of The Chat House where Post columnist Michael Wilbon was online Monday, Aug. 20, at 1:15 p.m. ET to take your questions and comments about the latest sports news and his recent columns.
The transcript follows.
____________________
Reston, Va.: Maybe the Wizards should have kept their name as Bullets. Are the Wizards just unlucky or just a reflection of American gun culture? Without identifying players, what percentage of the Wizards own guns and what percentage of NBA players own guns? Does the league office promote or frown on it from a personal safety standpoint??
Troubled and Disillusioned
2007: DeShawn Stevenson - shooting at his Florida home today.
2006: Lonny Baxter arrested for gun possession near White House (after shots fired).
2006: Agent Zero gets arrested in Miami for "being an NBA player."
2005: Andray Blatche: victim of shooting in 2005; arrested in 2007 for solicitation.
Michael Wilbon: I started searching for a "good news" question to begin the Chat with, but couldn't find one, so we'll just jump in with this one, which addresses this morning's news that someone was apparently shot in DeShawn Stevenson's house. And while I have no idea what percentage of Wizards players own guns I doubt it's any higher than the percentage of gun owners on other teams in the NBA or the NFL. I suspect, actually, the percentage of gun owners on NFL teams is higher simply because more of its players are into hunting. Anyway, as for this latest Wizards episode, I just shook my head when I was told and didn't have any real reaction either way. Maybe I'm numb to it all. You know the league frowns on it, but there's a second amendment right, last I checked, that allows American citizens to bear arms.
_______________________
Rockville, Md.: Mike,
With the news of another NBA shooting, it adds yet another layer to my growing displeasure with the NBA. I am 30 years old, married with a 2-year-old and another on the way. I recall gladly the early '90s when the game and the image of its players were well respected. I was a huge fan of Dan Majerle and those Suns teams back then. I looked up to them and even the "rogues," were tame compared to what we see these days. The NBA isn't a league I relate to any longer and that is a shame because I love the game. Is it the money? Is it the types of people recruited to play ball these days? Or is it simply a younger generations game? Are the Tim Duncan's and Tony Parker's of the game the exception now, or are they still the norm? I hope it's the latter.
Michael Wilbon: What I wonder is why you specify the NBA in your unhappiness. Do you follow the NFL and MLB? Does Pacman Jones not register to you, or is it somehow less offensive when an NFL player is in trouble, or in the case of the Bengals, about 20 percent of the team seemed to be in trouble (okay, I might be exaggerating a bit). But this is an interesting perception which I address frequently: who is in trouble, specifically, and how is it viewed? There's too much gun play and trouble confronting players in all three of the big American leagues, and of course it has to do with available money, a sense of entitlement, and in too many cases childhoods that I would want nothing to do with...Also, for every fool in the NBA you can name, I can't point to people like Grant Hill and Steve Nash and Antoine Jamison and Dikembe Mutombo and Alonzo Mourning...So, I wouldn't be so quick to paint everybody in the NBA with a thug brushstroke.
_______________________
Paris, France: Michael;
I know this is going to sound a little vicious, but I hope Donaghy names more refs. There has been a gambling problem among the refs that goes back into the late 1960s and 1970s that has never been dealt with -- especially when Stern was Director of Security for the NBA. If this whole problem forces him out, maybe a new commissioner -- in addition to cleaning up/out the refs suspected of gambling--can worry more about the game oncourt instead of the marketing of the game, can stop Bennett and McClendon from ripping Seattle and King County of the Sonics, and can answer more to the spirit of the game rather than the letter of a rule when situations like the end of Phoenix/San Antonio (Game 4) occur.
Michael Wilbon: Wow, this is powerful and insightful and outs you as a serious, passionate, smart but angry NBA fan...I don't agree with every sentiment you express, but what you are voicing has to be addressed, so thank you.
_______________________
Charlottesville, Va.: Michael,
I love the work, please keep it up! What do you see happening for the Atlanta Falcons. Are they going to cut Vick or would they try to trade him? And what could they do this year since Shockley will be out. Could you envision the 'Skins trading a proven veteran like Brunell for a draft pick or player?
Michael Wilbon: I don't think Mark Brunell has any real value to any other team out there...not enough to give up a high pick. What, you want to trade him for a conditional 7th round pick or something? I can't imagine the Falcons having a great season, though I could see them winning, oh, 7 or 8 games if Harrington stays healthy. If he goes down and the Falcons scramble any more at QB, we're looking at a lost season, and I mean 2 0r 3 victories...We're talking new coach, no Vick. And to think the Falcons are on MNF twice this season! How awful.
_______________________
San Jose: Reminder to the previous disillusioned commenter: "Exceptions" Tim Duncan and Tony Parker have won two championships in three years. Maybe the rest of the league will learn something from their example.
Michael Wilbon: David Robinson and Avery Johnson and Sean Elliott and others set that example even before Duncan showed up, so let's not act like those two are museum pieces...
_______________________
Columbia, S.C.: Thanks for taking the time to chat, love your work. On a recent chat you remarked about how interesting it was that there was so much outrage surrounding Vick, but so little on Leonard Little or Jamal Lewis. I think there are a number of reasons.
First, Vick is the quarterback. And, as many sports writers have said, it is the most important position in all of team sports.
Second, Vick is paid $130 Million. Why take the risk?
Third, and most importantly, sports coverage is much much much much greater than when the other people got in deep trouble. So, the newspapers and networks have to have something to cover. And this is especially true during slow sports news times.
Michael Wilbon: Of course, a QB in trouble is bigger than anybody else in trouble...No doubt. And they're paid so much more money to shoulder more responsibility and be more accountable than the other players. My bigger point, however, is that spouse abuse and drunk driving cause me to be more outraged than dog fighting. I hate was Vick is alleged to have done. And we're not talking anymore about simply dog fighting, heinous as that is...we're talking about dog murdering. It's unthinkably brutal and vicious...So is beating a woman, so is hitting a person while operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Yet, I hear so little outrage about these things.
_______________________
Silver Spring, Md.: Why hasn't David Stern appointed an independent person like former Sen. Bill Bradley or attorney Len Elmore to evaluate NBA officials?
Michael Wilbon: Good and fair question.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.: Have you read Jason Whitlock's column on the Ball State/Ronny Thompson issue. He mentions the column that you wrote last week. I consider both you and Whitlock to be two of the best in the business and enjoyed reading your differing views on the ongoing situation. Do you have any further comment?
Michael Wilbon: Jason is still my friend, and we see this issue differently, which is okay. I called Jason before I wrote and told him what I was writing, and he did the same...called me the night before. People can disagree and still be good friends...It ain't the first time and won't be the last.
_______________________
Colorado Springs, Colo.: I think in 10 years, maybe sooner, it will be legal for Americans to go to their doctor and asked to be but on a "steroid/HGH" regimen to improve their health. Will that put Bond's record in a different light? And even though they weren't performance enhancers, wasn't Babe Ruth's infamous boozing (not to mention the penchant for prostitutes) just as bad (from a a moral standpoint), as it was during Prohibition.
Michael Wilbon: Ah, you're asking about context and perception, which people just don't want to engage in these days. People, too often, don't want to think; they just want to react with no historical context. Seriously, the great majority of sports fans under 35 don't know squat. They know Ruth's name but nothing about the times he played in, what the habits of the day were...And not just Ruth, but anything that happened pre-SportsCenter. Don't get me started on this rant because it would consume the final 40 minutes of this chat. But to answer your specific question, I don't know what the sentiment might be in 10 years if we're all using HGH or "the cream" and "the clear" for good health reasons. We've been revisionist on a lot of people throughout history...
_______________________
Columbia, S.C.: Oh, don't get me wrong. I think that in weighing the crimes, murder and the beating of a spouse is much worse. In no way was I making a value judgment on crimes. From that stand point it is interesting the moral outrage.
Do you think that some of the outrage is from the uniqueness of it? I mean dog fighting? Unfortunately you hear about domestic violence, murder, etc. on a daily basis. That's horrible. But how often to you hear about dog fighting. Maybe that has something to do with it.
Michael Wilbon: Fair point. And thanks for responding.
_______________________
Falls Church, Va.: Any thoughts on Jose Offerman? It's scary to imagine a batter going nuts and attacking others with his bat. Still, I've seen a lot of commentators saying, "I don't defend what Offerman did, but he was provoked by the pitcher throwing at him." Is a pitcher who deliberately throws at a batter just as dangerous as a batter who swings his bat at someone? A deliberate HBP can certainly do damage.
Michael Wilbon: Glad you brought this up. People have been killed with thrown baseballs. Not many. And others have been seriously injured. Look at Tony Conigliaro's career. This might be the 40th anniversary summer of him getting beaned and never being the same. I understand why you'd want to go out there with your own weapon, if you just had a weapon fly into you or past you at 95 mph. This wasn't the first time, by the way. Juan Marichal, while pitching for the Giants, took a bat to John Rosboro while catching for the Dodgers in a similar incident, oh, 45 years ago. Bert Campanaris (God, I hope I'm spelling these names correctly because I'm going totally off the top of my head here) threw a bat at a pitcher some years ago, probably around 1970. A baseball, when thrown 90 mph, at somebody's head is a weapon.
_______________________
San Jose: More on the various scandals. It's worth pointing out that many of these guys who are (allegedly) disgracing the sports we love have been also-rans in the battle for championships. Vick? Zero. Bonds? Zero. Tank Johnson? Zero. Pacman Jones? Zero. And of course Zidane cost his team a championship when he lost it on the field in Berlin.
If the point is to field a competitive team and win a title, acting like a responsible adult does seem to really help. (Except of course the Italian national team...)
Michael Wilbon: I SOOOOOOO agree with you. Rarely if ever do fools help you win championships. This is one of my favorite themes in sports.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: I appreciate your doing these chats because it demonstrates that you care about your readers. Your paper has embraced your working with ESPN. In the old days, that sort of employment would have been discouraged if not banned because it could be seen as affecting your objectivity and thus, your credibility. I think there is a perception that you are less than objective regarding the NBA because you have a high-paying TV job analyzing NBA games. Obviously, YOU don't think yourself any less independent; my question is, do you understand how others might have reservations?
Michael Wilbon: First, great question on an important issue I confront. And second, of course I see how others could perceive my opinions on pro basketball as being different, or censored, though they aren't. Same goes for Tony and pro football. I could go for 20 minutes on just this issue (but won't). George Solomon, the sports editor at The Washington Post for more than 25 years and the man who hired both Tony and me, was also one of the first (along with Vince Doria of the Boston Globe) to see the value to the newspapers in having its writers do electronic media. One, it enabled those papers to keep presumably its top writers, and two, it gave those writers more access to more subjects.
So that's why some newspapers (thought not the New York Times) loosened their grip on their reporters and allowed them to do more work. Also, I don't know that the people you see writing columns across America now would still be doing that if they couldn't supplement their incomes with the money that radio and TV pay...which in most cases is several times annually what newspapers pay or can afford to pay...There are so many layers to this conversation.
But to wrap it up, if you want to see whether I'm avoiding controversies in the NBA, just go back and look at my columns from last year and see if I avoided criticism or even commenting on the important news of the day, particularly the Suns-Spurs issue...You know what? I need to go back and look at those columns myself, which is a good thing to do...Rarely does anybody shine a light on us in the media, so I don't mind when these questions arise. They ought to arise more frequently.
People are enamored, for better or worse, with TV and people on TV.
_______________________
Harpers Ferry, W.V.: Thought I'd change things up and ask a sports related question. Even spotting the Field a one week head start, do you like Tiger or the field in the FedEx Cup?
Michael Wilbon: Haaaa...Nice question. I think I might take Tiger anyway...You know how much he'd love to prove he could spot everybody a week and still win. I don't know whether that would be good for golf or not.
_______________________
Newport News, Va.: Michael,
Two thoughts on why dog fighting (or, dog killing, as those "executions" seem the real source of disgust) stirs up more passion than drunk driving and spousal abuse.
One, this is really the first time dog fighting has been so out in the open, and so directly connected to a major star who should know better. And what people are seeing and contemplating for the first time is simply shocking. That part is simple.
Two, killings dogs and even training dogs for brutal and fatal fights requires such a conscious and deliberate choice. A choice not made in a moment of passion. Not in an alcohol-soaked moment of stupidity. It's a choice made and reaffirmed over years of action to torture innocent and helpless animals (I don't care how tough they are; this is the truth in this context). All for a cheap little thrill. It is so deliberate. There is so much time to reflect on what you are doing.
It reveals an incredibly grotesque character trait.
Just my thoughts.
Michael Wilbon: I don't disagree with any of that, not a word. I just think there's also premeditation, in addition to the obvious negligence, when it comes to spouse abuse and drunk driving.
_______________________
Indianapolis: As a proud Big Ten Alum, do you have any thoughts on the conference creating its own TV network. With its launch just a week away, hardly anyone in the Midwest will actually get the channel unless that have satellite. Seems like another blatant money grab by a major conference.
Michael Wilbon: In the short term, I agree with you, though it seems every entity wants to control its own content, starting with the NBA and NFL who've already done this.
_______________________
Tired of sports goons? Try MLS!: Seriously, David Beckham's first full game, you get a 5-4, highly exciting slugfest between the 2 most recognizable teams in the league. Plus the players make comparable wages, so no need for a disconnect between them.
There's my cheap plug for the week.
Michael Wilbon: The players make comparable wages to what? To Beckham? You sure you want to make that statement.
_______________________
Re: fools with championships: Dennis Rodman
Michael Irvin
Michael Wilbon: But they were never fools on the field or even in the locker room. Ask Troy Aikman or Jimmy Johnson (and I have) what kind of teammate and practice player and workhorse Irvin was and they'll overwhelm you with stories. Rodman was a calculated fool...meaning he went for a money grab by creating a character that did foolish things, like wear a wedding dress and color his hair every week...But Rodman, on the court, was a monster...And even he caused problems. It took two personalities as strong as Michael Jordan and Phil Jackson to sit on Rodman when that was necessary. Rasheed Wallace could only work in Detroit because of the presence of Ben Wallace and Joe Dumars and Larry Brown. Two of those three are now gone, and look at Rasheed's meltdown last spring and how it cost the Pistons.
_______________________
Philadelphia: Fools help win championships all the time. There are numerous examples from all team sports. Rodman in basketball, Sheffield and Schilling in baseball. You can go far back too, with Namath and McEnroe, who are not considered "fools" now, but were at the time.
Your comment about fools not winning championships ignores the central theme in team sports that so many fans (and sportswriters) love to forget, and that is that teams win championships, individual players do not.
An perfect example of this is Alex Rodriguez, who despite being inarguably the best hitter in baseball over the past four years has failed to win a championship. Writers and fans are so fond of painting this as some sort of personal failing, when in fact it clearly isn't.
Michael Wilbon: You're definition of "fool" and mine are different. Schilling and Sheffield may say crazy things you don't like in interviews but they're not fools in or around the field of play. There's NOTHING in evidence that can support your statement. They play hard all the time. Both could wind up in the Hall of Fame. Now, if you're simply a conservative personality who wants everybody to be crew cut, that's your agenda, but it doesn't mean anybody who doesn't fit your views is a fool. McEnroe had an out-of-control temper, but was brilliant as a player. A-Rod is a fool? Your agenda scares me.
_______________________
Los Angeles: Mike, Elton Brand...my favorite NBA player is out for at least the first half the upcoming season...I'm distraught. What should I do? Did you see the film he produced, "Rescue Dawn"?
Michael Wilbon: I'm very down about this, too, because Elton Brand is a prince. He's got so many talents beyond basketball. There are, by the way, several players who are now into feature production, including Reggie Miller who has is own company (I want to say it's called "Boom Baby") and Baron Davis and, of course, Mr. Brand. It's too bad he's injured because the Clippers without him will probably be un-watchable.
_______________________
Madison, Miss.: Has there ever been an athlete like Tiger Wood who can make or break their profession? In those tournaments he skips, the revenue's drop, viewership drops etc.
He can skip the next four tournaments and still be considered the best this year. He is one remarkable person.
Michael Wilbon: Good point in your question? Jordan at the end of his career...Magic and Bird were already gone, and when Jordan left, there was that lockout season or strike season or whatever it was...in 1998. And the popularity of the NBA took a plunge after his retirement that's undeniable. But Tiger, in an individual sport, does seem to have golf by a choke hold, doesn't he? I'm disappointed whenever Tiger doesn't play. I watch anyway, but I'm a fanatic. I'll watch any golf. I watch Nationwide, the LPGA, a little bit of the Champions' Tour, but there's nothing like it when Tiger's on the board on the weekend.
_______________________
Capitol Hill, D.C.: Hi Wilbon,
To what extent do you think race plays a part in the common perception these days that the NBA is filled with "thugs."
I mean, there are 360 active players in the NBA. How many are in trouble with the law right now? Less than 5?
I think you'd find more than a few police chiefs or mayors across the country who would love to have that sort of law-abiding/lawless ratio in their communities...
Michael Wilbon: Well, probably more than 5 are in some sort of trouble, but I agree with your point. Even if it's 15, and I doubt the number is that high. My point, for people who claim to care about sports and all these image issues, is why do they not care what happens in the NFL when it comes to thugdom. What, that shouldn't count? Yes, it's about race, even when both sports are predominantly black. But the NBA is perceived, by white and black people, to be " a black league" and that certainly isn't the case for the NFL. Again, we're talking about perception. Last year, when the NBA All-Star game in Vegas was criticized for having too much thug behavior, who was guilty of the worst behavior? An NFL player, Pacman Jones. Yet, the behavior doesn't attach itself to the NFL to nearly the degree that the same behavior attaches itself to the NBA. Why? I think I know why.
Okay, gotta run. It's a full Monday, what with waiting for the Michael Vick situation to be resolved (hopefully today). We've got two more weeks without football, college or pro. We'll chat, as scheduled a week from today, which is the 27th of August. We'll skip Labor Day. But perhaps we'll do a special edition NFL chat either Thursday or Friday, Sept. 6 or 7...I'll check with the powers-that-be and we'll see what's possible...Thanks everybody. Enjoy this rare cool summer day....MW
_______________________
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
