Cousins SUSPENDED! (merged)

With the severity of the two suspensions vs. the actual acts so this season, I am beginning to wonder if this is a message to the Kings ownership and not to the players themselves. I may be reaching here.
 
Not all 22-year-olds are as immature as Cousins. Not even all 22-year-old NBA basketball players.

I'm not ready to jump all over Cousins. I think he is a basically good kid, who just can't seem to control his emotions. He keeps talking about changing, but hasn't so far. Still, I hope he will get it at some point. I really want him to succeed and live up to his potential. I like him.

Like they say, "don't get mad, get even." By that, I mean Cousins has to learn to channel the energy of his emotions into his play out on the court. Use his emotions, master them, instead of letting them master him and take him out of the game.

Do I think the penalty was rather extreme? Yes, to my mind and I really don't understand such a harsh penalty. Mostly what I feel, however, is disappointment that Cousins let his emotions get the better of him AGAIN. He will not reach his potential as a player (or a person, either) by continuing to behave this way. He hurt himself, but if that was all, then fine, go hurt yourself Cousins. But he hurt his teammates, the Kings organization and Kings fans.

So c'mon Cousins. Be a good teammate. Don't just talk about the need to get control of yourself, start doing it. If you want to achieve something, you have to start moving in the right direction.

of course not all 22-year-olds are as immature as cousins. but he's not one of those 22-year-olds. it will take time for him to learn from these mistakes, and if the kings organization is serious about grooming him into the best center of his generation, they'll stand behind him, and provide him with the mentoring, coaching, and tools necessary to effectively mature in the nba. the league should not have intervened in this most recent instance. they've set an unfair precedent in doing so. they should have left the kings in a position to fine demarcus for his actions, talk to him about the altercation, and move on in a productive fashion...
 
From elsewhere, yet a good question.

How on Earth did the Kings let this happen?

First of all, who told Cousins what Elliott said? Who was watching the Spurs' broadcast or sitting next to Elliott on press row and shared that info with Boogie? I'm legitimately curious. Was it a Kings employee? If so, UMMMMM. PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. Maybe it was one of Cousins' friends or managers who was around.

Once Cousins heard what was said and headed back out to the court ... where were any Kings employees? I mean, this was at Sleep Train Arena. It's not like the Kings would have been lightly staffed as they might be on the road. If you work for the Kings' basketball operations or security detail and you see DeMarcus Cousins come back out and wait for a commentator to finish his broadcast ... why don't you get in there and stop that crap before it happens? Why don't you get someone's attention so Cousins' teammates or coaches can help? (Francisco Garcia would stop this immediately.)

If a Kings employee did get out there in the middle of it, why isn't the team saying anything? This is basically a he-said, he-said situation. The Kings haven't said anything. This is the same front office that had no problem letting Paul Westphal light Cousins up with a press release. They were quick to issue that statement. But no statement from the team on this episode. Geoff Petrie couldn't be reached for comment by Jason Jones of The Bee. Reports have said the Kings don't agree with the suspension. THEN WHERE ARE THE KINGS? Most NBA teams a) try to prevent their players from getting in trouble and b) defend their players once they are in trouble. Once again, Cousins is out there all by himself. The Kings are acting like a team that doesn't mind that DeMarcus Cousins got suspended. That makes it ridiculous that they quietly sent out suggestions they are not happy and have since done nothing to defend their player in the public eye.
 
From elsewhere, yet a good question.

precisely. as i said above, you have to get behind your player. you discipline him as necessary for such transgressions, but you get behind him. you don't sabotage him in the media, as westphal did. and you don't leave him out there on his island, where he feels like the entire world is against him. does anybody honestly believe that telling a young man like demarcus cousins to "grow up" is gonna get the job done? it may sound like coddling, but somebody has to stick up for him in the simple spirit of the team. if there is any group of players in the nba that could use some galvanizing acts of teamwork, its these kings...
 
Kobe may have been a petulant child but if you read the summary of problems DMC has had in his short career - thanks LWP777 - you will be hard pressed to validate the point you're trying to make.

Bottom line is that something has to give - and I'm willing to bet it's not gonna be the league. They've made their position abundantly clear and DMC can either learn from it or face additional consequences in the future.

I figured someone else would bring this up, but I guess nobody has a good memory.

Kobe Bryant has been in several fights over his career. He has punched his own teammates. He ran teammates out of town and coaches out of town. He has had continued issues and I don't need to bring up the rape situation.

The message is that Cousins and the Kings franchise are unimportant enough to the NBA to be treated the same as its stars, so the NBA can treat him harshly to make it seem like they have standards. Basically, the NBA doesn't like how Cousins works against their new, gentrified image. They like Elliot representing that gentrified image, despite the embarrassing way he does analysis.

This doesn't mean Cousins is without fault or that what he did was correct. I am not sure what would have been correct. If he had dissed Elliot in post-game press conferences then he would have been attacked for that as well.
 
Carmichael Dave ‏@CarmichaelDave
From everyone I've spoken to about the incident, DeMarcus Cousins is LUCKY to have gotten 2 games.


Interesting, but doesn't mean much until Dave shows he has the balls to actually pass on what he heard. I hate when media types let everyone know they're withholding information. Either pass on the story or shut up.
 
I'm listening to Grant right now and he said basically the same.

not a quote but along the lines of 'after hearing what said i agree with the ban!'

so make of that what you will.
 
Unfortunate. I would like to hear what was said that made it so worth the suspension. Napear cannot be trusted, so I'd rather hear it from Dave.
 
If it's a threat to a member of the public I dare say it warrants heavy suspension.

Sean however isn't a member of the public. That's what makes this so unprecedented. If it was a fan there would at least be backdrop.
 
Not that that does the Kings any good at this point. I mean, appealing the suspension after he's served it? What is the best-case scenario: he gets his game check back? Well, that's good for Cousins, I guess. Not so good for Kings Fans.

As far as Cousins being "lucky" it was only two games, Carmichael Dave and Napear both strike me as being lily-livered. Is Cousins an immature kettlehead? Of course he is. I tend to be of the opinion that, unless he put his hands on Elliot, though, they should have let it go with a fine. I mean, talk means jack: if he threatened Elliot with murder, Elliot's response should have been, "Do something." Do we really believe that Elliot was afraid of Cousins? That he felt legitimately threatened? Or was it just that the wrong people overheard Cousins acting like a moron?
 
Not that that does the Kings any good at this point. I mean, appealing the suspension after he's served it? What is the best-case scenario: he gets his game check back? Well, that's good for Cousins, I guess. Not so good for Kings Fans.

As far as Cousins being "lucky" it was only two games, Carmichael Dave and Napear both strike me as being lily-livered. Is Cousins an immature kettlehead? Of course he is. I tend to be of the opinion that, unless he put his hands on Elliot, though, they should have let it go with a fine. I mean, talk means jack: if he threatened Elliot with murder, Elliot's response should have been, "Do something." Do we really believe that Elliot was afraid of Cousins? That he felt legitimately threatened? Or was it just that the wrong people overheard Cousins acting like a moron?



they said the plan is to try to get it appealed before tomorrow night game so he can play tomorrow, so it would help a little bit at least.


and i totally agree, if he didnt put his hands on Elliot it should have only been a fine
 
it's really difficult for me to imagine what words could have been said that would warrant such a punishment.

a personal threat with some colorful language? sounds like your average schoolyard pickup game. so it better be more.

if the punishment DOES in fact fit the crime, then it would have to be something like this...

a threat of physical violence of a sexual nature involving weoponry displaying both immediate and pre-meditated future danger directed at not only Sean but his wife, children, AND their pets, while using language of a racist, misoginistic, and homophobic nature so profane and extreme that it would make grown sailors weep and cower in terror, all of which happens in front of hundreds of fans who are predominantly young children dying of leukemia there as part of the 'make a wish' foundation whose collective sole wish was to NOT hear the exact words in the exact order that just came out of cousins' mouth. also their dogs are dying, and their houses just burned down. and cousins mentioned there is no Santa Claus.

But even then. Questionable.
 
Sean however isn't a member of the public. That's what makes this so unprecedented. If it was a fan there would at least be backdrop.

No, it wasn't a member of the public. It was a member of the media.....that is probably worse given that the confrontation happened because of things that Sean said while in his capacity as a broadcaster. Players can't go after members of the media for what they say while they are working.

Weather or not the punishment fit the crime will probably never be known. We don't know what the conversation was and what was said. If Demarcus threatened Sean then i think the punishment was warranted if he just told him that he thought he wasn't being fair or simply called him names then I think it was a huge reach to suspend him.
 
Carmichael Dave ‏@CarmichaelDave
From everyone I've spoken to about the incident, DeMarcus Cousins is LUCKY to have gotten 2 games.


Interesting, but doesn't mean much until Dave shows he has the balls to actually pass on what he heard. I hate when media types let everyone know they're withholding information. Either pass on the story or shut up.

Dude, what's your problem? It's incredible how much credit you give DMC. Dave is a really good guy and wouldn't make this up. Maybe he has his reasons for not giving more information. Why don't you just hold your boy DMC accountable for once?
 
Carmichael Dave ‏@CarmichaelDave
From everyone I've spoken to about the incident, DeMarcus Cousins is LUCKY to have gotten 2 games.


Interesting, but doesn't mean much until Dave shows he has the balls to actually pass on what he heard. I hate when media types let everyone know they're withholding information. Either pass on the story or shut up.

Maybe it's in Cuz's best interest that Dave doesn't broadcast the information? He is a fan after all, so I don't think he's strictly obliged to tell the world what a bad guy Cuz is or something alone those lines.
 
Dude, what's your problem? It's incredible how much credit you give DMC. Dave is a really good guy and wouldn't make this up. Maybe he has his reasons for not giving more information. Why don't you just hold your boy DMC accountable for once?
It has nothing to do with him "making stuff up." I don't have any particular love for Carmichael Dave, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he has the inside track on what really happened. That said, just because he knows what really happened, that doesn't mean that I'm willing to take his word for it that it's as bad as he says it is, because that's a totally subjective evaluation.
 
So, spitting on an 8-year old girls doesn't warrant a suspension. Resisting arrest and interfering with law enforcement doesn't warrant a suspension. And using homosexual slurs and other inappropriate language toward paying fans doesn't warrant a suspension. However, a verbal confrontation with a broadcaster and former player earns you 2-games.

Nice job, NBA.
 
So, spitting on an 8-year old girls doesn't warrant a suspension. Resisting arrest and interfering with law enforcement doesn't warrant a suspension. And using homosexual slurs and other inappropriate language toward paying fans doesn't warrant a suspension. However, a verbal confrontation with a broadcaster and former player earns you 2-games.

Nice job, NBA.
Yes. The league gets almost all of it's money from the media.
 
Yes. The league gets almost all of it's money from the media.

Without fans going to the game, there are no media dollars to be had. Negative actions towards fans should absolutely draw the harshest penalty. If you aren't gonna suspend players for verbal confrontations with fans, then the same rules should be applied when it applies toward members of the media. Applying a different set of rules is far beyond hypocritical.
 
Back
Top