1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Donaghy: 2002 NBA Playoffs series fixed

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by zebracoy, Jun 10, 2008.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    What kind of coverage should this be getting?

    About 1,000,000,000,000X more than Spygate.

    Hopefully, that's still to come.
     
  2. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Can't say I agree, because there's still a huge IF regarding the credibility of this story.

    Spygate was huge because the Pats were caught red-handed, there was no denying it. But that's certainly not the case here, the story relies on the word of a convicted scumbag who very well could be lying.

    It's true that if this is proven true, or just if some credible corroborating evidence is uncovered, this story will be a 1,000,000X bigger than Spygate, Steroid-gate or any other recent sports scandal. But not until then.
     
  3. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Trust me. There's no if here.

    It makes too much sense not to be true.

    I'll remain hopeful that this will explode and turn into the scandal that it should be.

    I just worry that ESPN will try to sweep it under the rug because of its relationship with the NBA and ABC.
     
  4. Big Chee

    Big Chee Active Member


    I felt that way the moment the story broke but was let down by the initial coverage.
     
  5. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    I tend to believe it as well but like I said earlier if you are so confident why have you not written this story. Words like "trust me theres no if there" leads me to believe you have proof.

    If true I hope to god ESPN does not become Stern's lackey
     
  6. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I haven't covered a NBA game in a couple years. Thankfully, I've been covering the NFL.

    In 2002, several writers, myself included, said the NBA should be investigated for the way that series played out. The bulk of the responses I got was that I was a conspiracy theorist.

    I am very worried that ESPN will do what Stern wants them to and will widely ignore the story.
     
  7. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    In that case, wouldn't you say you're coming at this with a fairly weighty personal bias? You've kinda got a vested interest in this story blowing up: the bigger it gets the better you look for writing that piece six years ago.

    Personally, I think the fact that he chose this game (and that 05 Houston/Dallas series when Van Gundy alleged the fix) is a reason he might be lying. Those are such obvious choices: choose the two games where there was already a well-publicized and notorious buzz about an alleged fix and people will be more likely to believe it.

    And, to be honest, he didn't give us any new information: instead he just regurgitated conspiracy theories that were already out there about those games, but claimed personal knowledge of their truth. Same thing with his claim about preferential treatment for stars--everybody'd already been claiming that happened--Donaghy just regurgitated those claims as something he knew to be true.

    I'd like to see what specific details he can provide--exactly who told him, on what dates, what circumstances--and how those details hold up under scrutiny and cross-examination. I'd also like to see if he can tell us any new information that the conspiracy theorists weren't already claiming to know.
     
  8. PeteyPirate

    PeteyPirate Guest

    Yeah, Mizzou, let us know how big the cash bonus is for being right six years ago.
     
  9. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Um, Gregg was criticized by both teams for his strike zone. Bavetta is only being criticized by one of the two teams for his calls.

    Taking a look at the stats from Game 5 of the '97 NLCS:
    (source: baseballreference.com).

    Greg Maddux went seven innings, threw 86 pitches, 63 for strikes. Atlanta reliever Mike Cather pitched one inning. Nine of his 16 pitches for strikes. Maddux struck out nine in his seven innings, Cather one. Combined: 10Ks, 102 pitches. 72 strikes. 70.6 percent of pitches were strikes.

    Livan Hernandez went the distance for Florida, striking out 15. He threw 143 pitches, 88 for strikes. His percentage of strikes thrown was 61.5 percent.

    Sounds to me like Gregg's strike zone was pretty large, FOR BOTH STARTING PITCHERS!

    Hitters on both teams were complaining, because they were seeing pitches 8 inches out of the strike zone being called strikes.
     
  10. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Nobody cares, nor should they, that we were right six years ago, but I will definitely take satisfaction in that shithole league getting what's coming to it.
     
  11. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    Wow.

    Mizzou, you are fun to read on here, but I sure hope you don't get that NBA beat again.
     
  12. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Thank God there is no chance of that happening...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page