Fear the Beard debate topic: ‘hood loyalty versus personal responsibility part III, Paul Pierce and the “B” heard ’round the world.
Paul Pierce was fined $25,000 for the gesture that you can see him make to Al Horford at the 30-second mark of the video above. It occurred during game three of their first-round series with Atlanta. Had the gesture been made by, say, Brian Scalabrine, it is doubtful that much would have been made of it. But contextualized and framed by Pierce being from Inglewood, the “B” that he threw up was immediately interpreted as a gang-related and “threatening” gesture by the league. Should Pierce choose to contest the fine, his case will be arbitrated by David Stern. Stern better hit the books, because this isn’t a simple matter.
Kurt Streeter of the LA Times threw down his take yesterday. After speaking with him, he has agreed to monitor our comments here at FTB and contribute to whatever dialogue we can muster up. Thanks and props in advance to Mr. Streeter. From his piece comes the following.
I’m neither convinced Stern’s punishment was fair nor meted out smartly, and not convinced he made an example of the right guy.
Make no mistake, I’m on board with the commissioner’s intent. He’s trying to steer his league’s image as far from the pathologies of urban America as possible. When it comes to gangs, he should. In the inner city, the gang problem is a disease, an epidemic, a nearly intractable public health crisis that is steadily eliminating a significant swath of our society.
Intent aside, hoops watchers in Boston were quick to cry foul for another reason, noting that the gesture is done by Pierce and others every single game during pre-game introductions. The players have said that it stands for “blood, sweat and tears.” But regardless of the team’s definition, the sign also has well-known meaning outside of the Fleet Center. Though born in Oakland, Pierce was raised in Inglewood, home to a considerable number of Piru Bloods—the original Bloods—so I’m sure he’s aware of its meaning at the very least. But all of the discussion that has come out of the incident begs several other questions. First and foremost in my mind is this: why would the league want to increase the visibility of the matter by making it a media event? Without the fine, the matter isn’t nearly as newsworthy and the attention dies down. This was also noted by the New York Times’ Howard Beck.
“If the N.B.A. wanted to glamorize this, they couldn’t have done a better job,” said Jorja Leap, an associate professor in U.C.L.A.’s Department of Social Welfare, who has spent 10 years working in gang-affected areas of Los Angeles. “They’re just calling even more attention to this. We’ve got a big enough problem with gangs. We don’t need this.” According to Leap, that gesture is “the classic Piru Bloods sign.” Leap confirmed her suspicion with a number of former gang members who now work as “street interventionists” in Los Angeles.
For Dubfans, the gesture bears some additional significance, as it is nearly identical to one that Stephen Jackson throws up after a made three-pointer. Stack Jack also hails from Blood-affiliated turf and somewhat famously kept a red bandanna in his locker at one time. Thowing signs is even known as “stacking” in some parts of the world. But does that make the gesture any more significant than if it was thrown by, say, Austin Croshere? Well, uh, yes. And no. This is getting complicated. See, to me, you have to look at the whole picture. It is almost universally noted that Pierce is one of the league’s good guys. He and Baron Davis have even taken over the operation of the LA Stars charity game from Magic Johnson, likely the league’s most well known charity event. This is where I’ll throw it back to Streeter.
Paul Pierce is hardly a guy caught up in street madness.
Ask, as I did this week, the CEO of the Tufts New England Medical Center. She’ll tell you how Pierce sits on the hospital’s advisory board, how his name graces a surgical wing at her hospital because he’s given bushels of money, how caring he is to the children who end up there.
Speak to the director of the Santa Monica Boys and Girls Club. He’ll rave about the tens of thousands of dollars Pierce spent to refurbish the gym there, about the Celtic’s patient work with kids, and about how Pierce has given $1 million in seed money for construction of a new club in Inglewood.
So, where does this leave us? There is no simple, one-size-fits-all answer. Which is why the commissioner got this one wrong. Of course, players should be cognizant of the urban pathologies that they choose to endorse publicly. But the league should also be far more aware of the sensitivities involved. Putting Pierce on blast by levying a massive fine and the attendant publicity does all of the wrong things. First, it ignores his community work. Then, it unfairly singles him out in a league where even LeBron throws signs (albeit the Roc-a-Fella Records sign). Worse still, it ultimately makes him more vulnerable to opportunistic thuggery and vengeance from those wearing blue, which would be horrible for both him and the NBA. And perhaps worst of all, it puts the sign itself squarely in the middle of the public debate about the public-facing culture of the NBA; theoretically, Stern should be trying to keep this quiet right? How can his decision to fine Pierce possibly be good for the league?
David Stern has done a lot of good for the game, but more and more, he seems to be hopelessly out of touch with its modern wants and needs. He gives us dress codes, while a rogue ref is busy fixing games. He ignores the imbalance of the conferences to the point that the playoffs are a sham. And now he is scapegoating one of the game’s good guys in a way that only serves to glamorize the very thing he is trying to abdicate. This is grown-man business, Mr. Stern. Call up Paul on the phone. Fly him to New York for a meeting. But don’t put him on Front Street and douse him in gasoline to satisfy your own ego. It’s more than just wrong. It’s irresponsible and insulting. Both to Pierce and to the game you are trying to protect.
Let’s get it popping in the comments. Mr. Streeter is patiently standing by.
Turman
PS. The Celtics look to go up 3-1 on the Cleveland LeBronettes in a couple of hours.
Update: Series tied. But, in related news, Pierce to LeBron, “Your moms is in my business!”
Yep, Stern’s headed down a slippery slope. One that leads right to Mutombo’s index finger. It’s virtually impossible to police this stuff - celebration swagger, jawing and trash talking, hand signs, tattoo significance - absolutely no way. If Stern wants to play culture police, then I agree with DT and Streeter and he should at least learn something about who he’s policing before meting out punishment.
Comment by matthewmeschery | 05.12.2008 | 3:45 pm
I appreciate the commentary here. It’s great stuff and really thoughtful. But I have two problems with the assumptions:
1) It is unclear that the Lig fined Pierce because his “menacing gesture” was gang-related. The Lig dished out the same fine to Stevenson for a throat-slash. Sometimes a “menacing gesture” is just a “menacing gesture.” The gang connotations are fascinating, but seem to be an association that has been made in retrospect by reporters and bloggers.
2) It seems just as plausible (if not more) that the Lig was concerned about the macho-grandstanding in the first round. And wanted to nip it in the bud before the games really counted. It appeared as preemptive action in accord with the rule that players are not to leave the bench. Stern and Stu have made a concerted effort to make sure they don’t have to legislate another Malice in the Palace.
3) I’m always puzzled by the authority that is afforded to Stern. Stu Jackson is the dispenser of Lig justice. He’s also a respected and accomplished basketball professional in his own right. Not only does the blaming of Stern for all Lig decisions continue this myth of one-man rule, it disrespects Lig figures like Jackson and members of the rules committee who themselves negotiate and help decide the rules of the Lig.
Comment by phdribble | 05.12.2008 | 4:58 pm
well, three i guess…but who’s counting…
Comment by phdribble | 05.12.2008 | 5:00 pm
Some very good points above. I agree that Stern probably needed to ease off of the knee-jerk regulating of the gesture. (I’ve never been a fan of the dress code. Are ugly suits any better than sweats?)
After watching the replay… it does seem a little weird. So after the play, Pierce felt the need to walk towards the Hawks bench to throw up the “blood, sweat and tears” sign? Are the Hawks thinking thats a “B” for Boston? Good guy or not… I wouldn’t remove that gesture from having a little menace.
Just wondering…what would the fine be for throwin’ up the bird in that situation?
Comment by cocomotion | 05.12.2008 | 5:37 pm
Just to clarify… I don’t mind the fine. I do think it should have been handled a little more tactfully by Stern(as mentioned in the posts/articles). Maybe a lesser fine sends a message without over-blowing the matter. It’s still a tricky call though…
Comment by cocomotion | 05.12.2008 | 5:46 pm
The gesture, the walking up on the bench, and the scowl that accompanyed both were definitely menacing. And Pierce should, at the very least, choose his gestures and their moments of expression a little more carefully.
Apparently, giving the stout middle digit to fans is a fairly common occurence and has a fairly standard penalty. As far as I can tell, the last athlete to do it was Michael Vick of all people. He was fined 10 large. Basketball players also fined 10 gees for the same offense? Ron Artest. Allen Iverson. Bonzi Wells. And Brad Miller.
Dude, wait, Brad Miller?
I can’t find any record of players flipping each other off though.
If there’s an irony here, it’s that I’ve advocated that Stern should have kept this a private matter between himself and Pierce (at least for the first offense). But then here I am contributing to the publicity machine by blogging about it. this story’s got more layers than a Bloomin’ Onion at TGIFridays.
Comment by admin | 05.12.2008 | 5:58 pm
is there other evidence of Celtics team members using the “blood sweat and tears” sign? cuz if so, Stern ain’t hip. And to coco’s point - team mottos aren’t usually used as an “in your face” message. Although i have been known to spout a little “GIRLS KICK ASS” when taking down an opponent.
All the hypotheses aside - was it or was it not shown in a moment of frustration and, dare I say, intimidation? That makes me think he knows what he was doing, and why he was doing it. Of course there is a fine line between giving something unneeded attention, but also letting league members know that menacing acts aren’t tolerated. When you’re dealing with 50 guys that are over 6′5″ and 200 lbs, I’d run a tight ship too!
But Stephen Jackson is throwing up the “3″ not the “B”. (hugs)
Comment by lil b | 05.12.2008 | 6:52 pm
The bottom line is that a rookie running his mouth after a big play at the end of a win is stupid, pathetic, and yet totally within the bounds of acceptable, legal behavior. Throwing gang signs (or signs that someone from Inglewood CERTAINLY knows could be construed as gang related) and approaching the opposing bench in a threatening manner is stupid and wrong and probably the type of action that will merit a fine. Paul Pierce has been around way to long to be that foolish.
Why not take a cue from MLB or the NFL? If the quarterback takes a dirty hit, his center punches the offender in the throat and his QB pays the fine for him. You come in high and off the bag with your spikes and hurt my second basemen, I throw a 90 mile per hour missile at your soft parts. You still get fined, but the other guy suffers, and we aren’t talking about it days after the fact.
It’s obviously complicated, and I agree that Stern mishandled the situation. But if Pierce wasn’t referencing the Blood’s, why didn’t he take out a full page in the LA Times apologizing for his actions and stating what he did mean with the gesture? That would show up Stern, Horford, and make a positive statement about about the ills of gang affiliation.
Comment by beardedbarman | 05.12.2008 | 7:02 pm
Just the point. Who’s to say “3″ vs. “b”. Shoot, I’ve witnessed technical fouls on laughing and sarcastic clapping. This is a slippery slope.
I ask, who’s watching the watcher?
Comment by Gd. | 05.12.2008 | 7:54 pm
Welcome to the mix on this one PhDribble. And good points. (Sorry for the delayed approval of your comments as well.) You are very right about me and everyone else looking right over Stu Jackson’s desk. I think all of us have a tendency to assume that his decisions are meted out with, at the very least, the rubber stamp from on high. And it’s equally true that this insults his authority and credibility as an arbiter of hardwood justice. Nonetheless, it is Stern who will sit in judgment if Pierce chooses to appeal. The tendency to look past Stu isn’t a dis, it’s just reflective of the ultimate authority over all things hoops that is currently possessed by D. Stern.
To me at least, the more liquid judgments are related to your first two points. And these tie back to Matthew’s response. To wit, can the NBA really be responsible for accurately identifying cultural nuance as it pertains to the threats, taunts and jawjacking that is now (somewhat indelibly) a part of the game at every level? Some are serious. Some are tasteless. And some are harmless. It is a slippery slope indeed.
While I was failing to authorize your comment, Matthew and I were at the local Y for the Monday-night, full-court runs with the youngsters. I was actually pleasantly surprised by the lack of chatter, even when the two of us inadvertently combined for a surpisingly Liambeer/Rodman-esque takedown on an opponent’s drive. Old-man tactics sure, but sometimes, just playing the game is where it needs to be at. And to his credit, the recipient just got back up and took the ball out.
To that end, does anyone know what the hell Horford said to (presumably, of course!) precipitate the gesture? To me, that might be the key to all of this.
Comment by admin | 05.12.2008 | 11:53 pm
Another issue at hand that seems related: How do you understand and fit into this picture the recent nostalgia for the “good ole days” when men were men and elbows were elbows? Why have so many former players and fans begun to harp on how the Lig has gotten soft?
Comment by phdribble | 05.13.2008 | 7:52 am
Thinking about phdribbles question on “softness”:
I see where people are coming from with the nostalgia for the “good ole days”. Of course it makes me think of the “No Fun League”, and some of the rules pertaining to NFL roughness and taunting/celebrating. (Protecting the quarterback, especially)
As in the NFL- NBA athletes are simply bigger, faster and stronger than back in the day. Not only is a take-down more dangerous, but I’d be scared as hell of trying to break up a fight between some of the new-school dudes.
(I hope I never see Lebron lose his cool. Dwight Howard?- yikes)
Comment by cocomotion | 05.13.2008 | 8:54 am
i just have to do this
Comment by lil b | 05.13.2008 | 10:09 am
Regarding the above? Not so menacing. But oh so fineable. Oh man.
Now, back to the game. Nostalgia for the hard fouls of years gone by would be a subject best attended to by our resident expert Mr. Meschery, aka “Mad Russian Jr.” However, in past conversations with his pops (former Warrior and noted enforcer Tom), it was quickly revealed that there was a pretty well-defined code of behavior regarding hard fouls. No taking a guy’s legs out when he’s in the air and all that. This code was enforced by guys in the 6′6″/250 range rather than by the league. But is the threat of violence from somebody who’s ostensibly good at it a better deterrent than a fine? I don’t know. Would you rather get your ass kicked on TV or lose the equivalent of $250?
All in all though, it’s probably a much better sport without the fights. The problem is that it isn’t quite as naturally self-regulating.
Comment by admin | 05.13.2008 | 11:33 am
Funny thing about being caught up in the emotion of a game, you lose a lot of perspective. The Old Man and Wilt were teammates and good friends until Wilt died, but I think they threw down on more than one occasion. I believe one incident ended with a broken nose (not Wilt’s). My Dad kind of laughed at the Auburn Hills thing. But back when he played, fans weren’t paying $300 a ticket and there were no film crews around to capture any pugilism for a national audience. Yes, the gloves came off a lot more back then and, to respond to Cocomotion, scrapping Wilt Chamberlain probably isn’t that different than scrapping with Dwight Howard. The point is that back in the day, there was rarely any significant repercussions off of the court.
Comment by matthewmeschery | 05.13.2008 | 2:53 pm