In the wee hours after Boston beat Detroit, Villanueva -- who argued with Garnett late in the game, resulting in a technical foul for both players --tweeted that "KG talks a lot of crap, he's prob never been in a fight, I would love to to get in a ring with him, I will expose him"
A bit later, through two more tweets, Villanueva apparently revealed the reason for his initial message. He wrote: "KG called me a cancer patient, I'm pissed because, u know how many people died from cancer, and he's tossing it like it's a joke." And then: "I wouldn't even trip about that, but a cancer patient, I know way 2 many people who passed away from it, and I have a special place 4 those"
This became a pretty big story, with a lot of people weighing in and passing judgment on KG (tossing journalism ethics out the window in the process). Hours later, KG released a statement calling the whole thing a misunderstanding and asserting that what he actually said to Villanueva was "You are cancerous to your team and our league."
This struck me, and I assume many others, as pretty dubious. One, it seems like an odd piece of trash talk. Two, I can't think of anything that Charlie V has done to give the league a black eye. Three, Villanueva's completely hairless appearance (right down to missing eyebrows and eyelashes) could call to mind someone who is undergoing chemotherapy. (The real explanation is that Villanueva suffers from alopecia, an autoimmune disorder that causes such hair loss.)
I assumed KG's statement was just damage control, but then I heard that Doc Rivers corroborated KG's account. While Garnett might lie to protect himself, there's no way Rivers sticks his neck out by affirmatively confirming KG's story. If KG had called Villanueva a cancer patient and Rivers heard it (and wanted to protect his player), he would have denied hearing anything. It's possible, of course, that Doc misheard it, but it seems unlikely that he would have misheard it exactly the way KG later lied about it.
For this reason, I'm firmly in the camp that KG was telling the truth. But let's assume for the sake of argument that KG did say what Villanueva claims he said:
1) I'm certain that it wouldn't be anything close to the worst thing one professional basketball player has said to another during a game. The difference is that Villanueva publicized the (alleged) remark, and to a general public that has nothing to which to compare it, it sounds worse than it is.
2) Villanueva's comments don't make a lot of sense to me. His second and third tweets indicate that he's upset that Garnett would treat something as serious as cancer so lightly. But there was no mention of that in the first tweet. Moreover, in this column, Henry Abbott of TrueHoop has a statement from Villanueva's brother that indicates that Charlie was more upset at the bullying regarding his skin condition.
3) I don't mean to suggest that Villanueva's the bad guy here. I think Villanueva legitimately thought he heard KG call him a cancer patient. After the game, understandably frustrated with both the loss and the juvenile insult he thought was hurled his way (an insult he's heard his whole life), he hastily tweeted that he wanted to fight KG. Once people read that, he had little choice but to explain himself -- only he wouldn't want to admit that Garnett had gotten under his skin.
4) Adrian Wojnarowski, who seemingly never misses an opportunity to blow something out of proportion, wrote that KG is a bully: "For years, he's gone after smaller, younger players. He never goes after tough guys. Never. " Well, so what? Basketball's a competitive game, and players like KG employ trash talk and intimidation techniques in order to gain a competitive advantage. Going after "tough guys" wouldn't make sense; these techniques would have no effect.
I've got no real conclusion here. Just offering my thoughts on a the hot issue of the day.
No comments:
Post a Comment