I have seen the future of the NBA... - Page 2 - Detroit Pistons Fan Community

TaShawn · #11 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dba

Given though that the precedent for granting or denying (or charging more) insurance coverage based on statistical stereotypes is pretty well established, you might have the deck stacked against you.

To me, that would open the door for them to price discriminate. Charge 50% more for drivers under the age of 25 or something like that. I just find it unbelievable that you can own Google at the age of 24, fly to Orlando to meet with a company that you are considering acquiring, and you can't even drive yourself to the meeting because Hertz won't rent to you.

I guess I'll have to look up the history and see if this practice was ever challenged.

With this and the drinking age at 21, I'm really surprised that the law allows for 16 year olds to drive.

BallDon'tLie · #12 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:36 PM

I could see where rental car companies wouldn't want to rent to Canadians due to the whole "driving on the wrong side of the road" thing.

TaShawn · #13 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 08:13 PM

(I officially apologize for this diversion, but this should be my final post on rental cars).

OK, did a little research. It looks like it was challenged in NY and the rental car companies were forced to rent to 18-24 year olds afterward.

Quote:

Effects of People v. Alamo Rent A Car on Current Law
The Alamo court interpreted N.Y. General Business Law § 391-g to require car rental companies to rent to drivers under twenty-five based on the finding that the NYAIP was "available" insurance under the statute. The lack of comprehensive coverage under NYAIP for damage to rental vehicles concerned Appellant rental car agencies because of the greater frequency and severity of accidents among younger drivers. The court remained unmoved by these concerns. The statute's language suggested no intent to provide rental car companies with full insurance to cover all risks. Instead, the court determined that the language of the statute suggested that added costs for additional coverage could be passed on to the younger renters.

In the future, rental agencies cannot refuse to rent to those over eighteen years of age. People v. Alamo Rent A Car, Inc. forecloses the argument that the statute was meant to fully protect rental car companies from the risks of renting to younger drivers and emphasizes the non-discriminatory intent of the legislature.

Unanswered Questions
The court states that the legislative history supports the view that the provision creates a safe harbor for rental companies -- that it is not discriminatory to charge young drivers more to offset the costs of added insurance. Thus, car rental companies can pass on the cost of additional insurance to young renters. The court does not address the situation where the car rental companies want to charge young drivers the total cost of additional insurance for injury to drivers, third parties, and third party property damage. Also, the court does not place limits on the amount that drivers may be charged for such insurance.

Survey of the Law in Other Jurisdictions
At this time, New York appears to be the only state in which the issue of age discrimination in the car rental industry has been litigated. Although Connecticut is considering legislation similar to New York's, no other state has made age discrimination unlawful for the rental car industry. John Caher, Court Lifts Age Barrier in Car Rental Business, Times Union (Albany, N.Y.), Main, March 28, 1997. It is unclear why other states have yet to follow New York's statutory protection of young drivers.
A directly opposite view to this type of legislation is taken by the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia's legislation, passed through both Houses of Congress, specifically allows age discrimination in such cases: "It shall not be an unlawful practice for a motor vehicle rental company to fail or refuse to rent a motor vehicle, or to impose differential terms and conditions upon the rental of a motor vehicle, based on the age of any person, where such action is reasonably related to accident risk or threat of public safety." District of Columbia Code 1981, § 1-2534.

liibulletin: People v. Alamo Rent A Car

So I guess the conclusion is that it might very well be unlawful, but has only been challenged in NY and D.C.

coynejeremy · #14 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaShawn

(I officially apologize for this diversion, but this should be my final post on rental cars).

OK, did a little research. It looks like it was challenged in NY and the rental car companies were forced to rent to 18-24 year olds afterward.

liibulletin: People v. Alamo Rent A Car

So I guess the conclusion is that it might very well be unlawful, but has only been challenged in NY and D.C.

Yeah, generally you can rent at 21, but you pay an extra fee per rental day until you're 25.

KarmasComing · #15 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 12:18 AM

WELL SAID DBA.

Lebron and Pierce in a shoot out with the refs thrown in. If this is the NBA's future it is dead.

pass99 · #16 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dba

LBJ: “We both tried to will our team to victory and, just like Dominique Wilkins, I ended up on the short end and the Celtics won again. I think the second round of the postseason, Game 7, these fans will finally have an opportunity to forget a little bit about what Larry Bird and Dominique Wilkins did and remember what Paul and LeBron did. This will go down in history.”

Yeah, go down in history perhaps as the game that most typified the demise of the modern NBA. What incredible hubris. The only similarities between that game 7 and this one are the court size and the length of the game. Larry Bird in that game was the top scorer for the Celtics by only one point (McHale had 33). Three other Celtics scored in double figures, four Hawks beside ‘Nique were also in double figures. Yesterday only two other players in total, from both teams, scored more than ten.

This was not a game of high flying excellence, this was a game that so typifies the complete lack of fundamental basketball skills shown by today’s superstar players (and coaches, more on that below) that it will surely become iconic, not for what is good about the modern game, but for all that it lacks.

There was little defense played. Yes, perhaps a majority of the players who never bother actually tried to get into the passing lanes, but no one, other than perhaps Ben Wallace (more on that below too), actually defended. Still, even token efforts were enough to completely discombobulate the two offenses. The Celtics / Hawks game 7 was no defensive gem either (Hawks shot 57%, Celtics 61%), mostly because those players could hit wide open jump shots, which no one on either team yesterday could so. That’s not pressure, that’s not strong defense, that’s just bad offense, and bad fundamentals.

Offensive schemes were by and large omitted from yesterday’s game plan anyway. The few times LBJ and Brown allowed the Cavs to actually run plays, they were quite successful – a couple of open dunks by Ben Wallace, a couple of open jumpers from Z, some nice cuts by West. But, Brown treated his offensive sets as things to be used occasionally, to deflect attention from LBJ and his one on five drives time after time after time. At least this time the officials weren’t bailing James out every single drive (perhaps those days are over after the James and Wade officiating fiascos of the past several years?), but he still managed 19 free throws, mostly because no one on the Celtics can defend.

Brown doesn’t coach, he points LBJ towards one hoop or the other. But, at least he didn’t seem to be actively trying to throw the game, as Doc Rivers certainly seemed to be in the fourth. Despite Pierce seemingly able to get whatever he wanted, and shooting over 50%, the Celtics only manage to get him three shots in the fourth. Rather, they throw the ball into Garnett in the post against Ben Wallace time after time. At the best of times KG wouldn’t recognize a post move if he saw one, and against Ben isn’t the best of times. You could see the wheels turning in Doc’s head… “Gee, Wallace didn’t let him get a shot off that time. Huh. Let’s try again. Oh, he stopped him again, well, third time’s the charm. Man, that didn’t work either. What to do? I know, KG in the post!”

And the Cavs? When they missed a late shot and desperately needed to foul to stop the clock, only Ben Wallace had any notion of the time / situation in the game. He sprinted from under one hoop all the way down the floor, passing three other Cavs, to foul and stop the clock. LBJ was standing at the other end watching, no doubt chewing on his nails. That is a complete breakdown… of coaching.

Nice game from the announcers though. JVG was dead on a number of times, both pointing out fouls that were flagrant-one’s that weren’t called (both were right I thought), as well as pointing out LBJ travels, and his utter cluelessness on defense.

Bah humbug. I have seen the future of the NBA and it is bleak.

Great post.

What you saw was the concept of the extended media spectacle. Delusional emphasis on rampant individualism.

An individual exhibition on parade led by two very bad coaches.

KarmasComing · #17 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 01:04 AM

I just re-read this and that first paragraph is a Lebron quote?

Get over yourself Lebron.lol
That is Pierce arrogant.

**max** · #18 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 01:40 AM

I agree that ( great article by the way ) that the pre-age rules desimated the talent but we should be recovering from that by now.

I see a few things going against us.

1) Expansion, there are almost double the teams now since Wilkins/Bird squared off.

2) Age of the mega-contract. Teams are spending over half their cap space on 2 players. This does not leave much over for the rest of the team and a lot of guys are signing oversees now rather than taking a 1 year min contract deal.

3) Foreign influence. Touched on above. Are we getting more talent or losing more? It almost seems like more US players are going oversees than foreign ones comming here. Why sign a 1 year deal when you can get 5 years at double the amt each year in Europe? Are we getting the guys who can't cut it over there to fill our benches with?

The Low · #19 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 04:18 PM

Whoa....I was on board with you there until....

Quote:

Originally Posted by dba

- no dunks

C'mon man....two words: Dominique Wilkins

Quote:

Originally Posted by dba

- 1.5 points for non-assisted baskets, 2 or 3 for assisted baskets

I'm not so sure fans will be to interested in a 92.5 to 92 final score. You think there are conspiracy theories now....just wait

Quote:

Originally Posted by dba

- take a point away for every flop and return the ball to the offense

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure we want to set rules based on the always measurable "intent" or player thought process. You can't call fouls based on assuming a guy intended to fall down. I'm sure we can agree that there's no way to keep this from being used to single out players who have been judged in the always objective court of public or referee opinion to be "floppers." Besides, I'm no fan of giving the Kobes and Lebrons of the world carte blanche to just run guys over expecting to get a call or at least have the other team penalized by some arbitrary "flopping" rule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dba

- each player's ultimate NBA salary for the first three years is pegged to their development Sprocket Points ranking.

So, do they get $0 for the first year? You don't have any meaningful stats before they play their first game and I'm no fan of bailing out owners because they aren't smart enough NOT to pay millions more than they should for unproven talent. If they want to ruin their franchises every 5 years, that's their problem.

Telling players they won't get any money for the 1st 3 years won't solve anything. A players personality is what it is and he's going to be the same guy regardless. Guys will still make it their goal to hit the NBA "big time." The fact that there are 18,000 willing to pay $20 to $50 a pop to fill an arena makes the money available and it's just a matter of who gets it and when.

TaShawn · #20 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 04:43 PM

I'd like to add a rule that says that timeouts can only be called in deadball situations.