Ball Played: Indians cannot hang on by their fingernails in loss
May 27, 2015Where LeBron’s amazing happens
May 27, 2015Dwight Howard has nothing to do with Cleveland sports and due to the fact that his team, the Houston Rockets, trails Golden State 3-1 in the Western Conference Finals, he probably won’t for this season. That said, Dwight Howard was involved in a play against Andrew Bogut that was eerily similar to the one that J.R. Smith was involved during the Celtics series with Jae Crowder. In both cases, players swung wildly at a player that was trying to physically impose their will on them. In both cases, someone was smashed in the face. But in J.R. Smith’s case, it ended up costing a flagrant-2 and a two-game suspension while Dwight Howard got a flagrant-1 and no suspension.
This is not a defense of J.R. Smith or a claim that he shouldn’t have received his punishment. His play deserved the punishment he got in my mind because it was so brutal in terms of impact. And I’m sorry to drag J.R. Smith back into something so negative, because he’s rebounded so well from this mistake, but it needs to be done in light of the Dwight Howard play.
Here’s J.R. Smith’s shot on Crowder again.
And here is Dwight Howard’s shot on Bogut.
Obviously the impacts were different. J.R. Smith’s shot caught Crowder in such a way that it looked like a devastating blow out of the UFC. Dwight Howard’s motion was about the same, but he didn’t catch Andrew Bogut in the same flush manner. Still, it’s hard to look at the two plays and not think that they’re basically the same level of intent. I’ll never believe that J.R. Smith intended to knock out Jae Crowder, but that’s the risk he took when he swung his fist blindly behind him in retaliation to some physical play. Dwight Howard took the same risk as J.R. Smith, and apparently it was only worth a flagrant-1 and didn’t result in any kind of suspension.
Here’s the NBA’s stance on the play.
Rod Thorn has confirmed Dwight Howard's foul at 8:07 of 3rd quarter last night as a flagrant foul one. pic.twitter.com/lDJQCWhaQb
— NBA Official (@NBAOfficial) May 26, 2015
I don’t know what all is at play in this decision, but it seems wrong for Howard not to have had his penalty upgraded and maybe even received a suspension. Maybe it has more to do with the results – J.R. Smith really kinda connected with Crowder – and Smith’s history of trouble and suspensions. And maybe that makes it acceptable.
From my vantage point it looks pretty inconsistent.
16 Comments
Because Houston needs as much help as they can get on and off the court. I don’t think it matters GS should seal the deal tonight.
Results oriented, IMO. Had Crowder been a half foot closer, JR slaps him in the chest, and does it even get noticed?
/ can’t watch the videos at work so might be talking out my …
that and the other big man didn’t fall down, or act like he had been hit with a sledgehammer
Same action, but Crowder fell awkward and messed his knee up. Bogut just got a sore jaw but his lively hood didn’t change.
Because Dwight Howard is Dwight Howard and J.R. Smith is not Dwight Howard. The intent was clearly there with Howard’s swing as well…Bogut just wasn’t positioned correctly. Move him a foot and he’d be nursing a broken nose and MAYBE the NBA would have to deal with it.
I don’t like the outcome determinative analysis, if that’s what the league is using. J.R had an easy target with Crowder’s face right next to his; Horford’s wind up cost him a direct hit because Delly was still sliding but his intent was to harm.
I think history should matter. J.R.’s history of non-basketball head-hunting implies the most severe punishment. Horford’s was clearly intentional but the first time he’s lost it. Bogut is constantly doing that crap and Dwight’s head shot was an in-kind shot to Bogut’s initial head shot. Context matters, history matters, good or bad aim should not.
Bogut had his arm locked up for a bit, and Howard was trying to get free. Of course, he knew what would happen if he swung, but that seems a likely defense.
Disagree completely on history. It goes against fundamental principles of justice. I know this isn’t a court of law (that much is obvious)–but one’s history in the form of prior bad acts (similar acts) is excluded as evidence because of high prejudicial bias. Every accusation should be judged on its own, and that’s the way it should be. And IMO, it should be focused on intent in that play, in that specific context. No broader.
A defendant’s criminal history is taken into account during sentencing. That’s the better analogy here.
In that case, though, the jury decides the guilt, while the judge determines the sentence. They try to keep the jury’s underlying determination free of bias.
Here, the NBA exec (and in NFL it’s the same stupid thing), is both the judge and jury (and runs the business, negotiates bargaining agreements, etc). If the leagues did want to try to be more fair (and they won’t because that would mean giving up control), they would have an independent person judge disciplinary matters and recommend punishment.
I have a feeling the Warriors win by 20 regardless.
Let’s not pretend Dwight is a saint. I know he’s an easy target, but he’s quite prone to retaliation when he gets frustrated with overly physical play. Without actually researching, I’m willing to wager that he has been suspended for this type of action before. I see very little difference between these two situations (JR and Dwight), be it history, context, or intent. The only differences are 1) JR connected, which led to 2) a much worse outcome for the “victim.”
agreed
In a way it was kind of appropriate JR knocked Crowder all but out with a blind back hand given the way Crowder was acting throughout the series.
None of those look as bad to me as Horford’s elbow on Delly.
Smith’s punishment was made worse because Crowder ended up injured on the play. If Crowder had the ability to fall down without hurting himself, Smith’s punishment would likely have been more in line with Howard’s.