Did Commissioner David Stern Mishandle LeBron James and Dan Gilbert

Speaking after the NBA’s summer Board of Governors meeting at The Palms Casino, Commissioner David Stern criticized “The Decision” show on ESPN and fined Cleveland Cavaliers Owner Dan Gilbert for his comments concerning LeBron James.

When I first heard the news, I was very happy to hear that the Commissioner had spoken on both issues. 

However, after reading Stern’s comments, I was left with the impression that the Commissioner really did not really say and do what needed to be done.  The comments by Commissioner Stern missed the mark on an individual level and in the broader context of what is occurring within the NBA.

In regards to James, Commissioner Stern had this to say about James decision to air “The Decision”:

I would have advised [James] not to embark on what has become known as 'The Decision.  I think that the advice he received on this was poor. His performance was fine. His honesty and his integrity shine through. But this decision was ill-conceived, badly produced and poorly executed. Those who were interested were given our opinion prior to its airing.

The Commissioner then added that he felt that:

I think [James] is both a terrific player and a very good person.  Had he asked my advice in advance I might have suggested that he advise Cleveland at an earlier time than he apparently did that he was leaving even without announcing where he was going.

The problem with the Commissioner Stern’s comments concerning James is that he is being inconsistent.

On one hand the Commissioner is suggesting that he believes that James conducted himself with “honesty and integrity” during the Decision.  

Yet, the Commissioner is also saying that LeBron delayed in telling Cleveland his intentions after he had decided he was not going to return to the Cavaliers.  The implication within the Commissioner’s comments is that James knew his decision and waited, causing the Cavaliers harm as they waited and missed out on other free agents. 

How can Commissioner Stern believe that James acted with integrity in negotiating with the Cavaliers if he withheld information from Cleveland that caused the team harm?

The Commissioner’s comments toward Dan Gilbert were also puzzling.

In fining Dan Gilbert $100,000, Commissioner Stern said,

I think the remarks by Dan Gilbert, catalyzed as they may have been by a hurt with respect with the respect to his team and the people of Cleveland, though understandable, were ill-advised and imprudent.

I think Dan Gilbert is a good owner and I think he was completely correct in expressing his disappointment and his determination to win. In fact, if he wants to guarantee a championship, more power to him. I'm going to tune in to watch to see if he can do it. But you would need read the rest of the statement to see where I think it was a little bit to the extreme and his follow-on interview.

Commissioner Stern characterizing Gilbert’s comments toward James as "a little bit extreme" is a like saying that Shaquille O’Neal is a little bit bigger and taller than NBA Referee Dick Bavetta.

Gilbert’s comments and the manner in which he made his feelings known about LeBron were incredibly extreme.  Gilbert’s rant even included Gilbert dropping the price of the LeBron James Fathead to $17.41 to draw an analogy between James and Benedict Arnold, who was born in 1741.

Over the next 20 years, when an owner of a professional sports franchise goes off the deep end does anyone really believe that the conversation at some point in time will not include a discussion of “The Letter” posted by Gilbert.

Additionally, Commissioner Stern waited until Monday to impose the fine upon Gilbert.  Why did Commissioner Stern wait so long to fine Gilbert?  Some of the negative publicity that the league received as a result of Gilbert’s actions could have been muted had the Commissioner acted more promptly. 

Commissioner Stern’s statements concerning James and Gilbert suggest someone who wishes to politely express displeasure while trying very hard not to offend anyone.   

The Commissioner, by the very nature of his position between the owners and players, walks a very fine line and one explanation for the statements by Stern is that the Commissioner is human and can’t always be expected to slam dunk all of his statements.

Commissioner Stern however is not new to the diplomatic aspect of his job.

Another explanation is that the Commissioner was overly cautious not to offend one of the highest profile players in the league and one of the most emotional owners in the league given the amount of labor unrest in the league. 

This past weekend at the Board of Governors meeting, Commissioner Stern reported that the league lost about $370 million last season.

The collective bargaining agreement between the players and the owners is set to expire at the end of the 2010-11 season and a lockout is possible on July 1.

The players union believes that a lockout is a very real possibility in that they have been advising players and their agents to spread out player salaries for this upcoming year over the next 18 months.

Maybe the Commissioner believes that a lock-out or strike is a real possibility on the horizon.

We do know that Commissioner Stern stated on Monday that the league was “very anxious to make an agreement [with the player’s union].”

If the Commissioner spoke gingerly to James and Gilbert because he was worried about upsetting the apple cart with the players union and owners, Commissioner Stern missed a golden opportunity.

In order for there to be lasting labor peace between the players and owners there must be open, honest and genuine communication.

The Commissioner could have initially extended the olive branch of diplomacy toward the players and the owners by acknowledging that he respects both James and Gilbert as individuals.

The Commissioner then should have said that James exercised poor judgment in this instance if he waited in informing the Cavaliers of his decision to join another team.   Commissioner Stern could have then added that players should not lose sight of the fact that as they expect to be treated fairly and with respect that they in turn need to extend the same courtesy to management.

Commissioner Stern could have ended his comments concerning James by stating that he believes what occurred between James and Cleveland in this case was an aberration and that James and future players in similar situation will act definitely in the future.

Commissioner Stern could then turn his attention to Gilbert.

Commissioner Stern, while playing to the emotions of Cleveland fans, could have said that while he appreciates the emotion of Gilbert and his passion to win that his actions were clearly inappropriate.

Commissioner Stern could then take Gilbert to task for speaking to James in the manner in which he did; he could tell Gilbert that sometimes how something is said is more important than what is said. 

The Commissioner, in fining Gilbert, should have said that he was serving notice to all owners in the league that such behavior would not be tolerated.

Commissioner Stern missed an opportunity. 

The players and owners are not quite at the brink of work stoppage, but it would be in everybody’s best interest to remind each other of the importance of mutual respect as we move closer to July 1, 2011.

Commissioner Stern needs to take advantage of every opportunity he has to remind the players and owners of how good life is being a player and owner in the NBA, and how both are dependent upon each other for their long term success.