clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Bullet Points: That Rascally Michael Jordan, Return Of The Mediator And Is It A Trap?

'Did I do that?'
'Did I do that?'
  • U mad, bro? Decertification talk at this stage in the game? Maybe it's the agents, maybe it isn't (it is), but the result is still what I feared in early August.
  • Shattering player solidarity is more dangerous than it initially appears. There's always a not-so-select few ready to paint players with the greedy brush. What if the superstars get completely fed up, decide to own that smear and do their worst? The stars are angry, very angry. If the union decertifies and stars refuse to come to the table it won't matter what the rank-and-file do or how they feel about the situation.
  • You again? I am going to develop a complex about Michael Jordan if this keeps up...seriously.  If he's not eliminating the Bullets from the playoffs or running the front office into the ground, he's leading an irrational, hard-line group of owners towards an NBA apocalypse? WHAT'S YOUR DEAL?
  • 37%? Perhaps this is just reciprocity with respect to the player-led decertification confab that took place sans union leadership. Perhaps I will lease a helicopter to take me to work in the mornings. There was always speculation that the owners weren't particularly unified...but the only way this makes any sense is if Peter Holt is actually Leslie Nielson and has been advising Michael Jordan like Sauron's ring 'advised' Gollum in the Lord of the Rings movies...
  • Max Dugan Returns! But changed his name to George H. Cohen!. I know what I mean. Hard to decide exactly how I feel about this one. On one hand, he left off mediating the last time because the two sides had come to an impasse on the BRI split. Does his return mean they're ready to deal? Well...
  • We are approaching a tipping point. That's what I conclude from Cohen's return to negotiation. Neither side seems more pliable in any particular respect, but both sides are struggling to maintain a cohesive front in the face of infighting. It won't take much to escalate into a coup on either side of the table (or both) and then all bets are off. Cohen is back because leadership on each side wants as much grease as possible if there's any chance at resolution or even significant progress before the crazed, vocal minorities start flexing their muscle.
  • Worst-case scenario? It's a trap! One side (or both) is already planning to pursue their nuclear option following failed mediation (in the paranoid scenario, mediation always fails) and will simply use it while sadly confirming every available option has been explored. What's that? They're doing that already? Ah, well, doesn't mean they won't do it again...that's how rhetoric works, hooray!