First Randy Moss gets released in part because he said some rude words to the Vikings' caterers, and now there's seriously a column by Adrian Wojnarowski on the front page of Yahoo! Sports arguing Kevin Garnett "stained his legacy" because Garnett allegedly called Charlie Villanueva a "cancer patient" as part of his trash talking during a game.
(Villanueva has a condition called alopecia which prevents him from growing hair.)

Look it's not a nice thing to say, and he shouldn't have said it, and Villanueva might have first asked for an apology before tweeting it to the world, but "stained Garnett's legacy?"

It's just something Garnett SAID. He didn't cause anyone to have cancer, he didn't cause Villanueva to have alopecia, he didn't get in someone's face who had cancer and make light of it - he was being a jerk to another NBA player on the court. This isn't Ben Roethlisberger or Donte' Stallworth or even Michael Vick.

But to bolster his case, Wojnarowski writes:

[Maurice] Lucas died this week. He was 58 and lost his life to bladder cancer. Apparently, Garnett honored that memory with the mocking of the Detroit Pistons' bald forward, Charlie Villanueva on Tuesday night.

Does anyone really think Garnett's insensitive comment had anything to do with Maurice Lucas? That it changes anything about Lucas' life, death or legacy at all?

Garnett might owe Villanueva an apology, and he might be advised to tone it down, but the notion that going over the line with some smack talk "stained his legacy" is a joke. Why is Wojnarowski throwing that kind of language around in reference to an ill-chosen bit of trash talk?

That said, as off base as Wojnarowski's column is, I will not allege that writing it "stains his legacy" as a journalist. It's just a minor error in judgment which we all make from time to time. Hopefully, we can reserve that kind of harsh pronouncement for actual crimes where real harm is done.