Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Informational Article about the Bobcats and their new owner from a local Charlotte magazine

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Informational Article about the Bobcats and their new owner from a local Charlotte magazine

    http://www.businessnc.com/archives/2.../tapscott.html

    No Fouls
    By Frank Maley


    To win in Charlotte, the Bobcats can't afford to take a page from the Hornets' playbook.


    Comment on this section
    Receive free N.C. Economic Development Guide




    Ed Tapscott has been waiting for this day almost 18 months. He stands stage left in Founders Hall, waiting for the show to start, decked out in a dark suit with a white hankie peeking out of the breast pocket. In his trade, he’s conspicuously short — just 5-10 1/2 . He’s also a little fidgety.

    He rubs his hands together several times, straightens his fingers and puts them to his lips as if praying. With a shave and a halo, he could be a caricature of corporate saintliness in a city that loves its successful businessmen. But Charlotte also is a place that has turned on successful people who don’t behave the way it thinks they should. He knows this — so far, only from what he’s heard and read.

    Tapscott is about to become a father of sorts, sire to the city’s second National Basketball Association team. In a few minutes, fans will learn the identities of the players from other NBA teams that the Charlotte Bobcats have chosen in the expansion draft. General Manager Bernie Bickerstaff, the head coach, put together the list with input from scouts and other staff, including Tapscott, president of Bobcats Basketball Holdings LLC. He’s Bickerstaff’s boss.

    They have a tough enough job trying to build a team from scratch. But the Bobcats feel pressure to build it with players who are good off the court as well as on it. That’s because Tapscott and his charges inherited an unfortunate legacy from Charlotte’s first NBA team, the Hornets.

    Its owner, George Shinn, alienated both the business community and the fan base with his behavior and demands. Though he won a lawsuit against a woman who accused him of sexual assault, his trial, played out on Court TV, embarrassed the city. So did a series of ugly events involving players. The team, unable to win voter support for a new, publicly financed arena, left for New Orleans at the end of the 2001-02 season.

    But most of the pressure comes from Tapscott’s boss, Robert L. Johnson, the founder and CEO of the Black Entertainment Television cable network, who paid a $300 million franchise fee to start the new Charlotte team. He has said that he expects it to be profitable immediately — and that it will win a championship. Not only that, but when the team’s name, logo and colors were unveiled in July 2003, he vowed: “My organization, myself and my players will never embarrass or let you down.”

    “Let me reshape what I think Bob actually said,” Tapscott says. “Bob has said we are committed to getting people here who will not cause issues. Nobody can guarantee anybody’s behavior on any given day, as we all know. However, that is a very important prime consideration in our selection process — the character and values of the members of our team.”

    Sounds nice. But nice isn’t necessarily what wins in the NBA, and winning is what sells tickets. While Johnson is back in Washington, D.C., running BET for New York-based media giant Viacom, Tapscott is the man who must make it happen in Charlotte, a city the Bobcats are catching on the rebound just two years after its bitter breakup with the Hornets. Fans are unlikely to be as forgiving of on-court failure as they were during that team’s early years.

    Facing that task is a 51-year-old who came into the job with little experience running an NBA club. Like Charlotte, Tapscott’s only other long-term relationship with a franchise started well but ended badly. After nine years with the New York Knicks, he was fired as vice president of player personnel. “It was a mess,” he says. “So we’re all better off having moved on.” He’s trying hard to make sure that he doesn’t one day have to say the same thing about his experience in Charlotte.

    In some respects, he seems ideally suited to run the Bobcats. Even Jeff Van Gundy, the former Knicks head coach whose ire Tapscott claims caused him to be fired, has nice things to say about him. “He’s really bright,” says Van Gundy, who now coaches the Houston Rockets. “He’s hardworking, and he does have the type of character that Bob Johnson says he wants.”

    To hear Tapscott tell it, you might think he grew up on Walton’s Mountain rather than in Washington, D.C. “I’ve just got the very best parents any one person could ever ask for,” he says softly, earnestly. “The interests of their children were always first. And they stressed all the correct values: Be unselfish, be hardworking, be modest, respect other people. All the correct values were seamlessly given to us.” The oldest of five kids, he swears he wasn’t a bossy big brother. “Sharing was a huge part of our family. We shared everything.”

    Tapscott’s happy spiel might gloss over the unpleasant moments each life encounters — “You never stop polishing your image,” he says — but others attest that he was a hardworking, self-motivated youth, something Tapscott says came from his dad, a data-systems analyst for the National Security Agency. “The two things he always stressed were think independently, be accountable for your actions. That gave you a certain sense of your own inherent, internal discipline. I never wanted to disappoint him, so I imposed discipline on myself.”

    On Tom Penders’ first day as head coach at Tufts University in Medford, Mass., he found incoming freshman Tapscott alone in the gym, practicing his ball handling and shooting. “He was always in the gym. He worked really hard at his game.”

    After he became eligible for varsity play as a sophomore, Tapscott ran Penders’ club as point guard. Sharing the ball was a big part of his job, and Penders says he did it well. But despite his sharing-is-caring upbringing, Tapscott still seems a little disappointed he didn’t hoist more shots. He mentions it often, usually in self-deprecating jest. “I was one of those heady, coach-on-the-floor type of guys — which meant I got to shoot two times a game.”

    After getting his bachelor’s in political science in 1975, he earned a master’s while working as an assistant coach on the varsity squad and head coach of the freshman team. He also met his future wife, Janis Thomas, in a history class. He returned to Washington and started law school in 1976 at American University, where he was an assistant coach. He continued coaching after getting his law degree, with a focus in communications, in 1981 and became head coach the following year. Thomas went to work for BET in 1981 as director of advertising and traffic. Johnson attended some of American’s games, and they became friends.

    Tapscott left at the end of the 1989-90 season, when American went 20-9, to work at Advantage International, a McLean, Va.-based sports agency. His clients included former UNC stars Sam Perkins and Rick Fox. At the 1991 Atlantic Coast Conference tournament in Charlotte, he sat next to Ernie Grunfeld, then the Knicks’ director of administration. They kept in touch. Later that year, Grunfeld was promoted to vice president of player personnel, and he asked Tapscott to take his old job.

    Tapscott moved up to vice president of administration and scouting in 1995, then to vice president of player personnel two years later. The Knicks made the playoffs every year he was with the team and went to the NBA Finals twice. But the team didn’t win a championship, and Grunfeld was fired as president and general manager in 1999. Tapscott says it was because of friction with Van Gundy over a player trade, which Van Gundy denies.

    Tapscott assumed Grunfeld’s duties, including responsibility for the rookie draft. For the team’s first-round pick, he took Frederic Weis, a center from France, over Ron Artest, who had played college ball at St. John’s University in New York. Tapscott says he discussed it with Van Gundy. Weis wound up returning to Europe without ever playing a game in the NBA. Artest is one of the Indiana Pacers’ top players.

    Friction with Van Gundy over the pick played a role in his losing his job, Tapscott says. “They had had to fire Ernie because of the alleged schism between him and Jeff. So they said they didn’t want to revisit that.” Van Gundy says he wasn’t the reason — nor did he discuss the draft pick with Tapscott. “I’m a little disturbed that he hasn’t painted an accurate account of that short window of time. But, hey, that happens. It’s somewhat revisionist history, because if Weis turned out to be great, I don’t think anybody would have been saying that was my draft pick.”

    Grunfeld, who had landed in Wisconsin as general manager of the Milwaukee Bucks, hired Tapscott as an operations and personnel consultant for the 2000-01 season. The next season, Tapscott did similar work for the Phoenix Suns, then worked as a commentator for NBA games on the Fox Sports and Comcast Sports Net television networks. That’s what he was doing when Johnson called.

    Charlotte wasn’t always a tough sell for the NBA. The Hornets started play in 1988. With the help of businesses eager to portray Charlotte as a big-league city, the team sold out every regular-season home game for nearly nine years. But the city’s elite never took to Shinn, who grew up poor in Kannapolis, made his millions peddling education to Vietnam veterans on the GI Bill and, early on, wore his religion on his sleeve.

    Shinn, who originally owned 51% of the franchise, surprised and angered fellow investors by exercising an option to buy them out after the first year. And while wealthy, he didn’t have the deep pockets many other NBA owners had. That would come into play a couple of ways. He angered fans by failing to re-sign some key players, notably center Alonzo Mourning. He began lobbying city leaders in 1995 to help him build an arena to replace the Charlotte Coliseum, which was seven years old but had only a dozen of the lucrative private suites that were driving the league’s economics. The Detroit Pistons, for example, played at the Palace of Auburn Hills, which had 180 private suites.

    In 1997, a woman accused Shinn of sexually assaulting her. He said that the sex was consensual. The district attorney’s office initially declined to file charges. But when the woman sued him two years later, the criminal case was reopened. This time, a grand jury declined to indict him. He won the civil case, but not without the televised trial. Later that year, center Derrick Coleman was charged with drunken driving after an accident that put teammate Eldridge Recasner in a hospital. In January 2000, guard Bobby Phills was killed while racing teammate David Wesley in their Porsches on a Charlotte street.

    Winning is supposed to cure off-court ills, and the Hornets were winning — making the playoffs six of the team’s final eight years in Charlotte. But by the 2000-01 season, the Hornets had trouble filling even half the coliseum’s seats. By the time the team and city had reached an agreement on how to pay for a new arena, city officials were scared to act on their own for fear of a backlash in upcoming municipal elections. They put it, along with a package of other building projects, in a referendum, which was rejected by 57% of voters. The Hornets headed for New Orleans.

    In January 2003, the NBA awarded a franchise for Charlotte to Johnson, making him the first black majority owner of an NBA team. It sweetened the deal by negotiating with the city for a $265 million, 18,500-seat arena downtown. The league took the heat off Johnson, but many residents are still irate over the city paying for a project that voters had turned down.

    Johnson had hoped to curry favor by persuading former Carolina star and NBA great Michael Jordan to buy part of the team and become its president. He asked Jordan who should run the team as chief operating officer. Johnson says Jordan suggested Tapscott. “He said, ‘The guy knows the game. He knows the players. He’s got a good instinct about how to deal with people.’ ”

    Tapscott was hired in January 2003. Jordan rejected Johnson’s offer to join the Bobcats that September. Eight months later, Johnson promoted Tapscott to president of Bobcats Basketball Holdings, which includes the Bobcats, the Charlotte Sting of the Women’s National Basketball Association, operation of the new arena and the Carolinas Sports Entertainment Television network, scheduled to start this month.

    Tapscott heard early and often how Charlotte residents felt about the Hornets. “The biggest challenge,” he says, “was inheriting a marketplace that felt disregarded, that had a sour taste in its mouth.” He, his boss and their employees have made a point to get involved in the city and build an image as nice guys. “We might be losing,” Johnson says. “But if we’re losing, we’re going to have people say, ‘Y’know, they’re losing, but I know Eddie, and Eddie is really trying to make that a winning team. I know Bernie. Bernie is really coaching to make that a winning team. Let’s support them.’ ”

    Tapscott, for example, sits on the boards of eight community organizations. “People on those boards tend to be influencers. If their perception of you is a positive one that says you buy into being a positive part of this community, they spread the message. None of us exist here in a vacuum. Without fans, we have no business.”

    Johnson got an early introduction to how things work in Charlotte. “The first time I came to town, I got a call from [Wachovia CEO] Ken Thompson. He said, ‘Bob, we’re raising money for the YMCA. I’ve got guys giving this. I’ve got guys giving that. I need you to give some money.’ So I’m in town less than three weeks. The next thing I know, I’m writing a check for $1 million to the YMCA.” Tapscott joined the YMCA board. In return for the Bobcats’ support, Thompson introduced Johnson to his top executives and asked them to support the Bobcats. Wachovia also invested an undisclosed amount in the team and bought a private suite.

    Shinn added a partner — from Atlanta — only after his image had tarnished. Johnson quickly brought in local investors, including Bank of America; Howard Levine, CEO of Matthews-based Family Dollar Stores; and Felix Sabates, owner of Top Sales Co., a manufacturers’ representative company, and one of Shinn’s original partners.

    The support of the region’s businesses will be especially critical in selling private suites. The team will play this season in the coliseum and next year in the new arena. While the coliseum had just a dozen suites, the arena will have 60. Prices range from $95,000 to $300,000 a season — well out of reach of most individual fans. Single-game tickets run from $10 to $115. The Bobcats won’t say how many season tickets or private suites they’ve sold, but the team’s Web site reports that its three priciest tiers of tickets — a total of 5,444 seats — have sold out.

    Until June, the Bobcats had nothing to sell except a logo and team colors. The team traded up from the fourth pick to the second in the rookie draft to ensure it would get Emeka Okafor, who played center on the University of Connecticut’s national championship team. He also was a finance major who graduated early — just the kind of player a city such as Charlotte might embrace.

    To build the rest of the roster, the Bobcats opted for young players who will keep it under the league’s salary cap. The maximum Charlotte can spend on salaries its first season is $29.25 million, about two-thirds the league limit of $43.87 million. In late August, the team was about $5.5 million below its cap. Tapscott hopes to stay under the cap until the team can spend the full amount in its third season. One reason is the uncertainty of what will be in the league’s collective-bargaining agreement, which expires in 2005.

    But the low payroll likely means the Bobcats won’t be very good or much fun to watch their first few years. The pressure to make the playoffs could grow quickly — more quickly than it did for the Hornets — and with it, the temptation to take a chance on players who might embarrass the Queen City.

    Tapscott knows as well as anyone that good players with bad pasts can improve a team’s on-court product. While with the Knicks, he helped swing a deal in 1999 for guard Latrell Sprewell — who had choked his previous coach. With Sprewell playing a key role, the team went to the NBA Finals that year. But a deal like that looks like a no-no now. “My approach here in Charlotte will be far more conservative than it would be in New York,” he says.

    Even so, the difficulty the team faces in avoiding embarrassment was evident in August. Jamal Sampson, one of the players the Bobcats announced in Founders Hall, was sued by a former roommate in Los Angeles. Christian Straughter claims that he suffered a concussion after Sampson pushed him down and kicked him during a fight over about $400. Straughter reported the incident to police, but the district attorney’s office declined to file charges.

    The Bobcats, who haven’t commented on the case, could make a public example of the 6-11 center. Sampson wasn’t expected to be a key player, and the $695,000 salary that the team would have to eat if it cut him isn’t large by NBA standards. But the fact that the team didn’t act immediately indicates that it will have something more than zero tolerance for embarrassment. And that Tapscott might have to keep reshaping what Johnson actually said.

Working...
X