There were many moments worth dissecting from Game 3 of the NBA finals, but the one being dissected the most didn’t happen on the court.
When Toronto Raptors guard Kyle Lowry hustled for a loose ball and a “fan” appeared to shove him, you knew instantly it would dominate the conversation. And it did.
My first thought was: what if the fan was Drake? What if the Global Ambassador put his hands on a player while cussing him out? He took heat for giving Nick Nurse a playful, stress-reducing sideline massage. How would the narrative be different, then?
As it turns out, the “fan” was associated with the Golden State Warriors — Mark Stevens is a minority owner.
The Warriors and the NBA announced that Stevens has been banned for a year and fined $500,000 for pushing and directing obscene language at Lowry.
“Can you confirm what the guy said to you? ‘To go blank yourself’ is that accurate?” Lowry was asked during an off-day press conference.
“Yeah. Multiple times,” he replied.
Stevens’ apology came via a written statement almost 24 hours after the incident and only after Lowry mentioned in his press availability that he hadn’t received an apology yet.
Lowry was peppered with questions about the incident during his media availability — 12 questions from eight different reporters, one of whom asked about the NBA’s owner-player relationships.
Draymond Green of these same Warriors has been campaigning to abolish the term “owner” for a while, because he doesn’t like the dynamic it reinforces. I had never thought about it much before, but now, through the lens of this interaction, it’s become clear that a lack of a strong punishment would confirm Green’s previous comments that the term “owner” is problematic.
Because it proves that the players are seen as assets, not business partners.
Multiple sources close to the Golden State Warriors tell me Mark Stevens, the minority owner who pushed Kyle Lowry, will likely be forced to sell his shares before the start of next season … #NBAFinals #KyleLowry
— Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) June 6, 2019
In 2018 when Green appeared on LeBron James’ HBO show “The Shop” he expressed his dislike for the word, suggesting it not be used.
His issue is that it dates back to days of slavery, when aristocratic white men owned black slaves.
“Very rarely do we take the time to rethink something and say, ‘Maybe that’s not the way,'” Green said. “Just because someone was taught that 100 years ago, doesn’t make that the right thing today. And so, when you look at the word ‘owner,’ it really dates back to slavery. The word ‘owner,’ ‘master’ — it dates back to slavery… we just took the words and we continued to put it to use.”
The perspective wasn’t solely voiced by a black man. On the same show, comedian and former Daily Show host Jon Stewart co-signed the sentiment.
“When your product is purely the labour of people, owner sounds like something that is of a feudal nature,” Stewart said.
Green’s statement wasn’t off the cuff. He originally voiced his dislike for the term in 2017 in response to controversial remarks from Houston Texans owner Bob McNair, who said the NFL “can’t have the inmates running the prison.” Green said on Instagram that he believes the term owner “sets a bad precedent” because it has the connotation of one person owning another.
Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban immediately lashed out with a rebuttal. “He owes the NBA an apology,” Cuban said. “To try to create some connotation that owning equity in a company that you busted your ass for is the equivalent of ownership in terms of people, that’s just wrong. That’s just wrong in every which way.”
Cuban is failing to see his blind spot. The way players are talked about externally and treated internally is as if they are assets. Their salaries are public. They have no choice where they work to start their career in the league. Their bodies are poked and prodded and measured in order to determine their worth. Their contracts aren’t negotiated via a full free market. You’ll always get pushback when you compare millionaire athletes to indentured servitude, but the fact remains that their physical prowess is being used to make other people money.
On top of that, when you refer to the person who is profiting off of them as an owner, the optics aren’t great. When you look at who makes up the players and owners, it reinforces a plantation mentality.
The NBA is comprised of just under 75 per cent black players (as of June 2018), according to a report from tidesport.org.
Meanwhile, there are only three owners of colour in the NBA, according to the same study.
Earlier this week, TMZ sports reported the NBA has had high level conversations about replacing the term “owner” league-wide since it feels racially insensitive in a league that is overwhelmingly made up of black players.
The thought is that alternative terms like franchisee, majority shareholder, managing partner, governor, chairman or chairwoman, get the point across without risk of dehumanizing. Larry Tanenbaum, for example, is the Chairman of the Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment board of directors.
Two franchises have already abolished the term after previously using owner. The Philadelphia 76ers changed their titles from owners to “managing partners” and co-owners to “limited partners.”
Steve Ballmer was first called the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, before his title was changed to “chairman” in 2018.
In the CFL, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats’ Bob Young prefers the title “caretaker.”
The interaction between Stevens and Lowry was a fluke and the two men will likely never interact again. Is the power dynamic at play as bad as Donald Sterling using racial slurs and parading people through the locker room to stare at his naked players?
Of course not.
The optics of a white owner berating a black player might be an anomaly but it raises an important conversation about the words we use.
Is language semantics, to a certain degree? Yes, but words have subtle implications, even if they’re not obvious to the non-offended party.
The good news is language is fluid. Words change as our sensibilities change. Some words we stop using altogether and the uncomfortable sideline scene on Wednesday is an example of why “owner” might soon be one of them.
[relatedlinks]
