Um ... fellas? Correct us if we're wrong, but you just agreed to the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement. If the new CBA does not adequately address the flaws in a league where players have far too much power -- and it doesn't come close -- it's your own fault. You should have buried the entire season.
What a bunch of dopes.
Before we get to the specifics of the Celtics and Rondo, those of us in Boston should all stop for a moment today and ask the following question: if the Celtics, and not the Los Angeles Lakers, had made this deal only to see it overturned, how would you feel today? How would you have felt four years ago if the NBA intervened and blocked the deal that brought Kevin Garnett to Boston? As much as this has to do with an ownerless New Orleans Hornets team operating under the control of the league, it also has to do with a flawed NBA system that boasts a phony salary cap and has too often kissed the feet of the aristocrats.
OK, so the commissioner stepped in here and prevented the rich from getting richer, as if he were some sort of round ball Robin Hood. But here's the problem: the deal was completely within the rules, which certainly suggests that the mighty commissioner, the all-powerful David Stern, can now arbitrarily exert his influence whenever he sees fit.
If that is going to be the case, why does the NBA need a collective bargaining agreement at all?
The NBA, more than any other league, is questionable enough to begin with. Even before the Tim Donaghy affair, by nature, the game has been vulnerable to scandal. The officials blow the whistle more than in any other sport. Point shaving is often suspected. One player can influence the outcome of a basketball game like no other major team sport, and Stern's influence always has been suspected on many levels.
