My normal pre-game routine is to come to the arena, shoot around if I get here early enough, and then do the gauntlet stairmaster in our locker room for 30 or 45 minutes, then stretch. My workout usually coincides with the media doing pre-game interviews and I always invite them to ask me questions while I’m huffing and puffing. It makes the time seem to go by a little faster.

Today, I got there in time to do 30 minutes, popped on the stairmaster, and started watching the Port vs. Indy game on ESPN. Of course they break in with a tease that I have been fined, and to stay tuned to find out why. Out of break, they come back with “…has been fined for offering to pay any of his players for retaliating against Bruce Bowen,” and it was in response to this play.

And they show a replay of Fin vs. Bowen.

Talk about predictable.

A couple minutes later the reporters show up to ask me about it. The Dallas Morning News had already posted the same misinformation on their website. When I questioned the reporter who wrote it, he dismissed it as only being the website. Then he tried to make the point that I actually beat the league and got off lucky because I only was fined 10k dollars that it was nothing till I asked him if he wanted to pay it.

But that’s not the good stuff.

It was then I told them that rather than providing any commentary or quotes to them on this matter, or on any upcoming matters, I would be posting whatever I had to say on my blog. They were not happy.

“How are we going to ask you follow up questions?” I explained that he could email me directly or from the site, but that I would most likely post his question and my response. “Is the league sending a message that they didn’t want you talking to reporters?” Ding ding ding. Give him a lollipop.

I went on to explain that this was the best way for all of us. They could get all the quotes and information they needed. “Will this be just you writing it, or will you dictate it to someone else?”

The satisfaction of knowing that each will have to explain to their editors what a blog is and argue for who knows how long about whether or not BlogMaverick.com is an attributable source crept over me and that jaunt on the gauntlet flew by.

Time for the game: GO MAVS!

ShareThis

Busy, busy, busy.

To start things off, the SEC filing for my purchase of shares in Mamma.com hit the tape. Everyone wanted to know why. Why this stock. Particularly when I usually am opposed to investing in any non dividend paying stocks at all. At some point I will write a book, ok maybe not a book, but definitely a couple blogagraphs on why I think the stock market is closer to a Ponzi Scheme or chain letter than it is an efficient market. But not today.

I invested in mamma.com for the same reason I invested in Netidentity.com back when it was known as mailbank.com. I love businesses with low overhead, that don’t need to be technology leaders to succeed, that generate cash that they can put in the bank, and at some point, hopefully payout to shareholders. I think mamma.com has that potential.

It’s not Google or Yahoo, nor will it be a top 5 search engine anytime soon. But it is a good metasearch tool that I use and have used. Google and Yahoo have become carbon copies of each other, and for me, other than usenet and news searches, it’s too big. I like the way Mamma.com organizes websearches, and I use it for picture searches.

I’m not going to make a big investment in a company just becauseI use its product. I invested in the company because it generates cash. I’m not into PE ratios, Price to Sales, etc., etc. I’m into good ole fashioned cash.

The company has a simple business proposition: sell its web traffic and keep expenses very low. As long as it can continue to grow its traffic and keep costs down, it will do what I expect of it put money in the bank at a rate of 15 pct or more of sales.

Hopefully, I will be able to help it along by cross-promoting it with other businesses I have, and providing technical and marketing support for their management team. Nothing in the business world is a sure thing, and please don’t invest in this company because I did, but I obviously like the company’s prospects.

Now that we are no longer talking about my Mamma.com, we can get to the follow up to my NBA business at hand. I’m not sure which will happen first, that you will read this blog entry, or see a Press Release from the NBA, but they fined me 10k dollars. Why? That’s where the fun starts.

In my conversation with the NBA’sRick Buchanan, who really is a good guy in a thankless job, he told me I was being fined becauseI told the media whatI had told Josh Howard. (You can seemyprevious entry for details).I wasn’t being fined because of what I said to Josh. Merely because I had told the media what I had told Josh.

In true NBA fashion, it doesn’t deal with the issues that necessitated my talking to Josh. The NBA feels that if they fine you, the reason you were upset and spoke out will go away and and everyone will forget that it’s a problem. Unfortunately, they are right. The NBA is a haven for short attention span theater fans.

Back to my fine…The league felt thatgiven the coverage of the discussion (they were quick to point out how many articles had been written about it) and the climate in the media following the craziness surrounding the Todd Bertuzzi-Steve Moore incident, that they needed to send a message. I can understand that. No problem.

What will once again be fun is to watch how the media covers the fine. They of course will write and report that I am being fined for “putting out a bounty on Bruce Bowen,” which of course I never did, but works a whole lot better in a story. Or some of the more responsible reporters will write thatI was fined for my “comments to Josh Howard in reponse tothe Bowen/Finley altercation,” which of course is incorrect as well. Think anyone will report that I was fined because I commented to the media? Me neither.

One last note, as is my habit, I will match the fine with a donation to charity. In this case it will be to Sickle Cell Anemia Research in the name of Taylor Delk, Tony’s daughter who has the disease.

ShareThis

…is that I get to respond to the media.

This is the email I got today from a columnist at the Dallas Morning News:

-Original Message-

From: “Blackistone, Kevin”

To: “mark cuban (E-mail)”

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 13:25:33 -0600

Subject:

Mark,

You’ve diverted my attention for the moment from the tournament. (If youwant in on our pool, though, let me
know.) The following is what I’m writingabout for Tuesday:

One, I understand you want to protect your guys, your investment, but Bruce Bowen is just a tough
one-dimensional player, not a dirty, I don’t think. The thing with Fin was bad, though. And just a few years ago, of
course, was the whole Juwan Howard-Spurs thing that knocked Derek Anderson out of the playoffs. Now, that was
bad.

Second, why not leave it to your coaches to coach Josh on how to handle the pressure. Plus, he’s an ACC
Player of the Year who logged four seasons in that league. He probably knows about playing tough.

KBB

PS Just curious, but not from a writing stand point: Did you ever haveanyinterest in Vin Baker?

Here is my response to him:

The stuff about a bounty on Bowen is bullshit. Never happened. And I know you like the separation of church and
state, and don’t like me near the players, but that’s your issue, not mine.

Here is the reality. WhatI do know is the tendencies of officials better than anyone on our team and
probably better than anyone in the league.

I pay to track it, and I pay attention to the information I get.

It’s not unusual for me to tell Del or our players for things to watch out for from specific officials. Are they
more likely to call blocks vs. charges, 3 seconds or not, etc. In this case we had a very good head official one
of the best in the league whose tendency is to let the guys play. He is the same official that told our guys
before a Spurs playoff game last year that this is going to be “just like in the backyard, call your own fouls.” The
same ref from the Brad Miller vs. Shaq game, and I can give you other examples of well officiated, but physical, games.
That is whyI was speaking to Josh.

I spoke to him in a break after Bowen had got up underneath Josh and was slapping at him when he had the ball. It
could be argued whether it was a legal guarding position or not, but that’s why I told Josh to legally use a ball swipe
to clear space. This was going to be a physical game and because he was the rookie he could be the one that
got the tech and I would pay the fine for it. Josh is certainly not the type to backdown from anyone, but all players
get confused from time to time trying to figure out how a game is going to be called. I knew exactly how this game was
going to be called once it got going, and that is why I said something to Josh.

Thanks,

M

This is what he wrote. Note that he conveniently used only part of my response to make it seem likemy comments
to Josh werein response to Bruce Bowen and Michael Finley getting into it. Unfortunately, he ignored the part of
my response that said it was not. My conversation with Josh was long before Fin and Bowen got into it.

And of course, this intrepid columnist completely ignored and left out the entire reason I was talking to Josh so he
could come in with a slam about why I shouldn’t be talking to players. How convenient for him.

From the Dallas Morning News’ Kevin Blackistone:

It was an ugly incident between the Mavericks and the Spurs and at the worst of times. This is not a recollection
of the Bruce Bowen-Michael Finley battle from a few nights ago, however. I’m recalling the second round playoff matchup
between Dallas and San Antonio three springs ago, when the Mavericks were happily participating in the club’s first
postseason in a decade.

In the opening contest, Juwan Howard, with the Mavericks then, struck Derek Anderson while Anderson was airborne
readying to dunk. Anderson landed hard and awkwardly and suffered a separated shoulder.

Howard was ejected. The Spurs were left fuming, calling it a dirty play.

In the next game, the Spurs’ Danny Ferry fouled Howard hard. The refs issued Ferry a flagrant.

Late in the third game, with the contest all but over and the Mavericks beaten, Howard knocked Malik Rose to the
floor. It was called a flagrant foul, too, and rightfully so. It was as unnecessary in its roughness as it was in its
timing. Howard should’ve been booted.

But Spurs owner Peter Holt, as best we know, did not tell his players he would pick up the tab for a league fine if
they got a technical for retaliating against Howard. That would be bush league, or National Hockey League, if you
will.

That, however, was Mark Cuban’s reaction to the forearm shiver Spurs defensive pest Bowen gave Finley a couple of
Fridays ago, baiting Finley into a response that led to Finley’s ejection.

Cuban reiterated his thought to me Monday: “I was speaking to Josh [Howard]. I spoke to him in a break after Bowen
had got caught up underneath Josh and was slapping at him when he had the ball. It could be argued whether it was a
legal guarding position or not, but that’s why I told Josh to legally use a ball swipe to clear space. That this was
going to be a physical game, and because he was a rookie, he could be the one that got the tech, and I would pay the
fine for it.”

A league official confirmed Monday that it is investigating Cuban’s comments. “We’re looking into it,” the official
said.

And you wonder how it is that certain players earn reputations as ruffians. Josh Howard doesn’t need it. The league
can’t afford to condone such things, either.

How can Cuban cry bloody murder over a questionable play by an opponent after standing by one of his players after
that player committed a far more dangerous act against an opponent? That’s disingenuous.

There is nothing wrong with looking out for your athletes, an investment in the hundreds of millions of dollars,
but not the way Cuban just did it. Make a report to the league. Let it handle the situation, as it did the other day by
fining Bowen and issuing him the flagrant foul the refs failed to pin on him.

Leave the playing of the game, and the coaching of it, to those employed to do so. They know the game the best, or
should.

Josh Howard has been playing basketball for quite some time. He played for four years in one of the toughest
college conferences in the country, the ACC, and was its player of the year last season. No doubt he learned long ago
how to deal with a physical player, even one like Bowen, whose tactics have been questioned by some of the league’s
best players, including Ray Allen and Vince Carter. Carter suggested not long ago that Bowen undercut him and caused
him an ankle injury. Bowen was fined a couple of seasons ago for kicking Wally Szczerbiak in the face, although it
appeared accidental.

Maybe he is a dirty player, but imagine how Cuban would embrace him on this team. A player known for being a
tenacious defender, no matter how borderline to being dirty, is a missing ingredient here.

The usually even-tempered Finley dealt with Bowen knocking him to the hardwood by returning the favor.

Enough.

Basketball has become plenty physical. It doesn’t need encouragement. It doesn’t need to become the dangerous
tit-for-tat game inside the game that manifests itself in baseball-turned-beanball and hockey-turned-back alley
brawl.

Not only that, but Cuban spends a lot of money employing so many coaches that they need a second row of seating at
games. If Howard needs to be reminded or taught how to shed a defender, the coaches can do it, especially those who’ve
played the game and done so in recent memory, like Ro Blackman. A player doesn’t need the owner telling him what to do,
especially if it’s out of bounds, anymore than the owner needs a player telling him how to price tickets.

E-mail kblackistone@dallasnews.com

The sad part of all of this is that despite his disregard for the facts, Blackistone is one of the better
columnists.

That speaks volumes about his profession.

ShareThis

One of the pleasures of owning a sports team is the fun of dealing with the sports media. The majority of reporters and columnists are good people. There are a couple, no make that 1 Sam Smith of the Chicago Tribune who I can’t stand. I don’t like that I don’t like him, because if I ever met him,I certainly don’t remember it. I don’t dislike many people. Disliking someone I don’t really know is just counter to the way I am.

Sports reporting has turned into a confused business. You would think that with the net, everyone would recognize that a “scoop” doesnt quite have the value that it did back in the days when the new stuff came with the morning paper. Today, every scoop gets posted to the paper website first, so the paper can prove they broke the story. It’s seen and reported on and immediately world-wide within minutes afterwards. That doesn’t stop reporters from focusing first and foremost on “breaking scoops”. Not stories. Scoops. Anything you think you know that the other guys don’t. The joy of getting the props for getting the story on the site before the other guy.

Their grab for glory is my continuous nuisance. It gets really old getting pestered about transactional items. Its amazing how many emailsI get … are you going to make a trade, did you make a trade, who are you going to trade? Who are you going to sign? Questions they all knowI won’t answer because the minute we do something, we are going to release it to the world in a press release. Yet the reporters hold out hope that maybe, just maybe, they can catch a deal or something else just before it happens and luck turns into a scoop. Scoops make the bosses happy.

If its not a transaction, it’s the game of trying to play “Get Mark Fined”. I actually don’t mind this game, but I’m amazed at how poorly they play it. After a Mavs game that was poorly officiated, it’s inevitable that the reporters at the game will come to me asking for a comment about the officials. Sometimes I will, sometimes I won’t. Just depends on what is happening behind the scenes. If the game reinforces something I had been telling the league about, then it usually helps to reinforce that issue publicly. Unfortunately, the only way you can effectively and easily communicate a message to the entire league is through the media. I couldn’t discuss officiating in any depth in a league meeting, but ifI criticize someone in the press,I know without doubt, everyone will read it and probably call the league to complain to them and ask them to fine me. But that’s a topic for another day.

Back to reporters and me getting fined. I have been trying to set them up and prod them to write proactively about officials. If a paper or media outlet would write an in-depth analysis of a game and the officiating, they probably could get me to talk for hours on the subject because there would be hard data to refer to. Time and again, I have suggested that they hire an official, retired, college, whatever, and have them go through the tape of a game and evaluate it. They won’t get every call right or be 100% in sync with how the league calls games, but it would be hard not to be 95% right, and to see just how well or poorly the game was officiated. I have suggested that they track some basic data. If every paper in anNBA city stuck a couple interns at a game and had them just track which ref made which call and then started aggregating the data, I would be so shocked that they did something that made so much sense and provided such a strong basis for a discussion, I would buy them dinner and discuss the topic allday long.

But sports media doesn’t work that way. The goal isn’t to know a subject cold and find elements that make all those read it smarter about the subject. There isn’t a Wall Street Journal or even a NY Times Business Section for sports. In sports, its about filling up 500 words. Quick story. On to the next day.

Which leads me back to Sam Smith. While the sports media won’t doin-depth analysis, it’s usually not the reporters fault. It’s the job they were given. At least theyshould try to make sure that what is in those 500 words is accurate. If those emails are aggravating, at least I appreciate them trying to get some facts. I can’t say that about Sam Smith. His columns have easily surpassed Peter Vescey’s as the place I can read about things I didn’t know I did or said. Which is because they didn’t happen.

Sam Smith writes that I was in Miami to see Pat Riley to discuss him becoming the coach of the Mavs. It didn’t happen. I had never talked to Coach Riley in my life other than to say hello on the court after we played the Heat. I’m the easiest person in the world to reach. There are a hundred places to find my email, and I check it more than most. He also could have called Pat Riley. Of course that would result in him having the truth. I wish I could just call Sam Smith lazy. He may or may not be, but I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt and guess that he isn’t lazy, that he is only malicious.

He knows how sports media works. He knows that no one in the business is going to care about whether what he wrote is true or not. He knows that every reporter that covers the Mavs or NBA is going to have to ask me if what he said is true. Each and everyone of those reporters will preface the question by saying that they know it’s not true, and that they know it’s Sam Smith writing this, but their boss wants them to check it out. And if they are checking it out, they are going to write about it. If they write about it, then wires will pick it up and it will be all over the net and news with me “denying” that I am talking to Pat Riley, and he also knows that within a day, that no one will remember that he started the process, and people will start commenting on the stories and adding their own speculation. So give credit to Sam Smith. He knows he is a malicious liar. He may be doing it as a favor to someone, or just because it makes him happy. Doesn’t matter. The effect is the same.

That’s what the sports media business has come to.

ShareThis

Thank goodness we started shooting our promos for The Benefactor. After last night in Sac, it would have been a painful day ifI didn’t have something to take my mind off the beating we took. At this point, all I can do is trust that Nellie will have our guys ready for the playoffs. Thereare so many ups and downs this season my ears are popping.

Back to the Benefactor. I wasn’t nervous at all. The crew was great. All real nice, no hollywood attitudes. We set up in Culver City with a mission of giving away money to strangers and hoping we could get a reaction that would work for commercials that would promote the show and casting.

If giving away money to strangers sounds like an easy, fun job, it was. Crossing the street at an intersection and just handing someone 20 or 100 bucks as you walk past them and hearing them gasp behind you and then hearing from the crew how they freaked out was fun, but it got better.

We spent time in a beauty school college, asking for fashion hints and handing out money while the song “Beauty School Dropout” ran through my head.

The highlight of the day came while we were outside the school shooting liners for the show. At various times during the day, I would get the expected “Mavs Suck, Lakers Rule” shouts that are normal everywhereI go in LA. But this time while we were shooting, there were some cars backed up at a light, and one guy just had to shout Mavs Suck or Cuban Sucks everytime he saw me start to talk. So we took a pause waiting for the light to change and this guy to drive off.

The light changes he starts to roll forward while we wait and has to get one more Cuban Sucks in there, and then crack! He rolls into the car in front of him. The whole crew just burst out laughing. It wasn’t even a fender bender: there was no visible damange andno one got hurt, but karma had raised its head. Of course, I suggested we go over there and make the most of the situation. So we gave both parties a hundred bucks, put ‘em on tape, and the Laker fan gave us some great humbling moments. And the lady he hit. She didn’t want the hundred till she found out it was from me. Then she signed the release because she liked the idea of taking the money from the guy who owns the Mavs. She likes the Lakers too.

More to come later.

ShareThis