設計對白
Stern: 你尐貨(product)呢！？全國直播你居然收起哂！？你係咪倒我米！
Pop: 聽我解釋先啦！佢哋太老喇，但係靜靜雞話你知，原來贏熱火嘅關鍵係⋯⋯（大家估吓）
Tim Duncan 三十六歲、Manu Ginobili 三十五歲、Tony Parker 三十歲、Spurs 九日內的第六場作客比賽、對戰休養四日的上屆冠軍 Miami Heat、隔天要回主場迎戰聯盟榜首的 Memphis Grizzlies 等等資料，難道 NBA Commissioner David Stern 一點都不清楚嗎？
可是 Stern 還更清楚一件事，每晚的比賽背後都是複雜的商業考量。以當晚情況來看，賽事只有兩場，分別是 Spurs@Heat 與 Nuggets@Warriors。而逢星期四全國直播 NBA 賽事的 TNT，二選一之下，根據戲碼與觀眾取向，自然揀選前者。儘管有人會跟筆者一樣不入主流，寧選後者，但現實是基於「常識」，普遍人（即包括不是 NBA fans）會選擇觀看有較多知名球星的前者。
很有趣，這套「常識」並不適用於對 NBA 乃至籃球有一定認識的人，「常識」是針對廣泛的普通人，因此不論 ESPN 以至各大小討論區的專家們怎樣討論，只要「常識」健在，Stern 的決定必然是合理而不應受到質疑的。至於我所強調的「常識」為何？除了之前提到的「球星效應」外，還有「入樽、插花、三分、紀錄效應」等，種種能夠吸引行外人的關注，以至着迷，或是炒作的便為此列。
舉個例，就在〇八年的 WNBA，Candice Parker 成為史上第二位女球員入樽時，我被坊間的討論嚇傻了！入樽本來只是得分的其中一種方式，無論動作有多難，到底也只算兩分。但鑑於能煽動情緒，有震懾全場的威力，這些 Highlight 吸引了很多本身不認識籃球的人。對於他們，入樽代表強是「常識」。
然而 Parker 的入樽除了成為「大新聞」外，竟帶來一些對 WNBA 的嘲諷！有人笑說 WNBA 真可恥，居然辦了這麼久才得兩個人入過樽，以為 WNBA 程度很低⋯⋯ 他們憑入樽衡量質素，着眼是有沒有像 Griffin 的「暴力入樽」讓他們叫喊，多於一個美妙的切入上籃。這類人觀賞籃球賽事時沒懂得欣賞當中的種種細節，但事實上這是再平常不過的事，正如我從體育新聞也只能看得見打 Golf 的最後一桿，而無法理解當中的精粹。沒辦法得到數據，但我估計這類 NBA 觀眾佔了總數的一半左右。
再談一點「常識」，便是養活 LBJ！他今季的年薪是 $17,545,000 美金，他的價值就是讓全世界認識 LeBron James 這名字，然後為他消費。而要令人深刻，就莫過於要他不斷製造 Highlight，使大眾都知道他很強，是 NBA 的 Super Star！把它成為「常識」！是叫好叫座的商品(product)！
就是這樣，Stern 必須掌握這種「常識」，並好好利用，因此他不能得失上述提及的觀眾！如是者，他當晚即時發表聲明，向球迷道歉，是極明智的做法，起碼免卻被秋後算賬的可能（要知道美國人很會投訴）。至於罰款，我懷疑是有可能要賠償給 TNT，但這點只屬猜測，比較有可能是要殺雞儆猴，保證沒閒錢的球隊不要仿傚。而說到底是，寧可得罪忠實 (hardcore) 的球迷，也不可輕易流失那些牽動聯盟收入的客戶及觀眾。這便是作為 NBA 當權者經營所需的一套邏輯學問。
David Stern 是聰明人，權宜得失算得準，因此他一直沒有刻意立例為此作出規範。
He has a nearly $5 billion a year industry to protect and can't like it when teams aren't willing to put their best product on display in a marquee game televised by national TV partner TNT. Fans and viewers were excited about seeing the Spurs try to complete an unbeaten road trip against LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and the NBA champions, so there was an understandable letdown when they learned of the absences.
But there's never a guarantee that any players are going to play, and Stern himself has previously made it clear he wasn't going to impose rules to change that.
The Cleveland Cavaliers rested a healthy James for four straight games at the end of the 2009-10 regular season. Owners discussed the issue later that week at a meeting in New York, and Stern reported that there was "no conclusion reached, other than a number of teams thought it should be at the sole discretion of the team, the coach, the general manager, and I think it's fair to say I agree with that, unless that discretion is abused."看看今次罰款所引用的原因便清楚證明，這個世界只是一切以利益行前罷了！
"The result here is dictated by the totality of the facts in this case," Stern said in a statement. "The Spurs decided to make four of their top players unavailable for an early season game that was the team's only regular-season visit to Miami. The team also did this without informing the Heat, the media, or the league office in a timely way. Under these circumstances, I have concluded that the Spurs did a disservice to the league and our fans."
Teams are required to report as soon as they know a player will not travel because of injury.
The league's statement said the Spurs were in violation of league policy reviewed with the board of governors in April 2010 against resting players in a manner "contrary to the best interests of the NBA."
Quoted from Spurs fined $250,000 for 'disservice'
有關這次事件，有兩篇 ESPN 內的文章很值得閱讀，也是本篇沒有涵蓋的部分，有興趣不妨一讀。
Did Popovich, or Stern, sit those players? / Get ready for wave of tendinitis in the NBA
