Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Robert and Jim and Mike go to Wall Street

As a foreward, let me just say that neither Mike, Jim nor myself made this video to either support and encourage or condemn and mock the actual #occupywallstreet movement. We’re talking about basketball. And trying to be funny. And while we’re trying to be funny (and hopefully succeeding), we’re actually really peeved about the cancellation of NBA games (you can read our formal declaration of grievances here). Alas, being really peeved about the cancellation of NBA games puts us (and probably you, Knickerblogger’s readership) in a rather small minority — the 1%, if you will. But if one starts to ask serious questions about why these games are being cancelled, it inevitably leads to some rather thorny, economic and political quandaries/issues/contradictions. Which I guess means we are, in fact, making a kind of political (if satirical/Swiftian) commentary. Drats. I’ve just tied myself into a pre-amblic Gordian knot. Let’s try again…

We interviewed some of the protesters down on Wall Street about the NBA lockout. What did we learn? Not much (except that attractive young women dig Ronny Turiaf). Here are some of the finer moments.

A bit that didn’t make the cut because it was just too durned long (but was hi-larious) was yours truly getting interviewed on camera about the 9-11 truth movement. Some press types cornered me and asked, “What do you think of the 9-11 truth movement?” and I went into a long-winded (quelle surprise!) diatribe about the fact that we all find conspiracy theories so compelling because they support the illusion/idea/hope that some omnipotent, all-knowing force is in charge of this miasma of chaos and inscrutability we call life. Even if the unseen power that rules us all is evil (like the Bilderberg Group or the Illuminati or any comic book/filmic supervillian), that’s preferable to Einstein being wrong and accepting the idea that God does in fact, “Play dice with the universe.” Anyhoo, I was waxing philosophical/poetic when the cameraman said, “That’s enough. Thanks.” I asked what the interview was for/where I might see it and he calmly said, “Sorry. We won’t use you. We’re looking for 9-11 Truthers.”

So if any of you stumble upon a documentary/Youtube clip stating #OWS is entirely populated by fringe Leftists, feel free to wholeheartedly debunk it with the above anecdote.

One more thing: Jim Cavan and I are not the same height. I was standing on a ledge when we shot the opening, like Tom Cruise does whenever he has to kiss a co-star taller than 5’6″. Side-by-side, Jim literally towers over me. Think Jared Jeffries and Nate Robinson.

Serious kudos to Mike K. for the boffo editing job. Enjoy…

 

 


18 comments on “Robert and Jim and Mike go to Wall Street

  1. John Kenney

    When you say you all “went” to Occupy Wall Street, you mean Robert invited you guys to his tent, right? And he probably called you from his eco-friendly cellphone from 1997 as well :)

  2. Jim Cavan (@JPCavan)

    Yeah, it got a little awkward when he insisted on reading us his poetry and talking about aliens over Michael Franti.

    As for his cell phone, I think he must’ve upgraded, because mine was by far the least advanced of the three.

  3. Jim Cavan (@JPCavan)

    BigBlueAL:
    “So you’re saying you’re a Nets fan??”lol

    I’m never going to live this down, am I? All I’m gonna say is I was taken out of context.

  4. Robert Silverman Post author

    Jim’s Nets joke was in the context of the guy talking about “Social Safety Nets” for awhile. I stand by Jim and the joke.

  5. Mike Kurylo

    Jim Cavan (@JPCavan): I’m never going to live this down, am I? All I’m gonna say is I was taken out of context.

    Honestly I don’t think the clip was that much out of context. It was largely out of left field, with a thin thread back to his original rant. That was the only time I lost it while filming and was actually laughing so hard I was crying while holding the camera.

  6. taggart4800

    Great entertainment guys! Also good to be able to put a face to the names.
    Appears to be some intense negotiating going on today but the sad thing is I am very underwhelmed. It dawned on me how cavalier and petty this whole argument is within all sports. The precedent that has been set by the last two lockouts (NBA and NFL) is not a good one and could perhaps do with a federal review of some kind. I would like to see a deadline set for independent negotiations to be completed. At which time, if negotiations are not successful, the matter is taken to an external committee who force the sides to make a deal.
    There was a comment I read, from ‘A League official’, in an article on Real GM that made the point that it is not just the stadium workers and their families that get hurt by this, it also spills over to subsidiary industries in local communities. I know this is hardly revolutionary thinking but it is all too true and unnecessary.
    I for one am not really bothered when the lockout ends or who got the best deal as I believe both are being as callus as each other. I just find the whole process a bit self indulgent, especially when the previous CBA seemed to have very little wrong with it besides really poor management decisions.

  7. Brian Cronin (@Brian_Cronin)

    I for one am not really bothered when the lockout ends or who got the best deal as I believe both are being as callus as each other. I just find the whole process a bit self indulgent, especially when the previous CBA seemed to have very little wrong with it besides really poor management decisions.

    That’s what I don’t get. (and I mention it because I think your opinion is a common one). If you think the previous CBA had very little wrong with it (outside of poor management decisions), then why do you think both sides are equally bad? One side wants the old CBA but would accept the same CBA with a seven percent reduction in their share of the basketball related income while the other side wants to blow the whole thing up. How are they both equal here?

  8. taggart4800

    For different reasons. I think what was wrong with the old CBA was the really poor management decisions, combined with minor system issues. However if one team over pays an average player the whole thing snowballs because other teams cannot afford not to. I agree with the Hunter and Fisher stance in these negotiations, who seem to be trying to negotiate a realistically modified version of a system that worked. The star players ‘we’re here to save the day’ rhetoric is a little tiresome and as arrogant as some of their behavior in Free Agency. STAND and LETUSPLAY really do nothing to add credence to an argument.
    The Owners are trying, like you say, to blow the whole thing up. I don’t feel this is necessary, but this is because I am just a fan of sport and resent the whole money driven side to it. I don’t fully appreciate all the financial wranglings but realistically I understand that the increased revenue should and often does lead to a better product. In the end though it is still just sport and I feel strongly that it should not be allowed to get to a situation like this.
    I guess in the end I have some degree of empathy with both sides and as a result also feel a degree of disdain towards both sides.
    I also believe that if a federally appointed committee was to formulate a deal with complete transparency from both sides, the outcome would be closer to the players.

  9. Robert Silverman Post author

    Via IncarceratedBob: **NBA BREAKING NEWS**Source: NBA Players & Owners have settled on 3 out of the 4main issues, source says agreement 90% done! Stay tuned #IBN

  10. Jim Cavan (@JPCavan)

    By the way: Kudos to DS for yet another wonderfully Gonzo reporting idea. Keep ‘em comin’!

Comments are closed.