OJ Simpson & the NBA Lockout

The way I see it, this NBA Lockout—and the NFL Lockout that ended a few months ago—is very much like OJ Simpson murder trial. In both the cases of a lockout and the murder trial, there was a legal dispute between two sides. We, the general public, believe, by and large, that we know what has happened, what should happen, and what is “right”. However, we, the general public, are not in charge; we are not the final arbiters of the disputes. Instead, there is an actual system in place. As part of that system, there is one party on whom the burden of proof lies. During this current lockout as well as the OJ trial, the public spoke and acted as if that burden does not exist. I find that naïve, destructive, and very dangerous.

First thing is that, yes, the burden of proof is on the owners’ shoulders. Like the NFL, this is a lockout, not a strike. It is the owners who want things to change. If things really do need to change, then the owners need to convince the players of it. There is no logical reason for the players to just accept that things need to change. The owners need to answer the question “Why?”

One thing the NBA owners have in common with the NFL owners and the LAPD investigators of the OJ case is that they lied while the burden of proof was theirs. The current NBA structure may not be viable in the long-term. I know that many people are out there saying it’s not, but I don’t know for myself. I haven’t seen the teams’ financial papers. I haven’t seen the models for the next few years. I don’t know. Somebody would have to show me. I would not take the owners’ word for it.

Back in 1995, we learned about many of the shady things Mark Fuhrman did in Brentwood. I admit that I did not watch a single second of OJ’s trial, so I don’t know all of the details that many of you do. I do know, however, that nothing with Fuhrman’s name on it was trustworthy beyond a reasonable doubt. Essentially, what the prosecutors wanted was for the jury to see beyond Fuhrman’s shadiness. For the past 16 years, I’ve figured that those twelve men and women did not think the rest of the evidence was enough to overcome the doubt created by Fuhrman. For the general public, though, it was enough to just “know” that OJ did it.

Similarly, we know that the NBA owners have been lying about team finances. People in the media and the public know this, but don’t really seem to care. They acknowledge that the owners aren’t being honest, but they still “know” that the model is failing. Bill Simmons, for example, keeps writing about how the compromises are obvious and “need to happen.” Why? He doesn’t offer any actual evidence to support his claim. He gives reasons, but backs his reasoning up with nothing to let me know that he’s actually speaking fact—he doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt since he was the primary creator of the LeBron went to play with his biggest rival nonsense—instead of just treating some idea of his as if it is actually truth. Yesterday, he did a podcast with Blake Griffin in which he said that the players need to understand that game attendance will continue to grow as a problem in this big screen HDTV, internet, iPad era. He might be right—he’s probably right—but where are the projections? Plus, who knows what those effects will be? As of right now, no one. Basically, he believes the players need to give some money back and his rationale is that we don’t know how the assumed dwindling numbers at the gate will affect the league’s revenue stream.

What kind of logic suggests that players should give back money because no one knows how much money there will be? It’s the players’ money. It’s theirs right now. The owners need to prove to them that they need it.

But, no. people want their basketball, players need to understand that the system isn’t working, and it doesn’t matter that the owners have been lying about many things throughout the entire process. Knowing it isn’t enough. And it shouldn’t be enough. It should never be enough. We’re talking about people’s lives and livelihoods here. “I can’t see any way it could have been anyone other than him.” So what? I don’t feel comfortable damaging people on the strength of someone else’s lack of imagination, insight, and creative thinking. Get out of my face with that nonsense.