Steve Kerr’s marijuana comments opened up a larger conversation the NBA must have

The NBA community is talking about about marijuana, and not because a high-profile player tested positive. A coach, instead, made an argument in favor of allowing players to use marijuana for pain relief. In this week’s Flanns & Zillz, we discuss the ramifications and the conversation to come.

FLANNERY: Steve Kerr caused a kerfuffle over the weekend when he told CSN’s Monte Poole that he tried medical marijuana as a means to deal with back pain two summers ago. That’s a perfectly logical course of treatment. Kerr’s pain was so debilitating that it forced him to miss part of last season and medical marijuana is legal in the state of California where he lives. Many people have chosen a similar path, but most people don’t coach the Golden State Warriors.

The larger point that Kerr was making is that Vicodin and other prescription pain pills are invasive. We’re in the throes of an opioid epidemic that often begins with developing an addiction to prescription pills. The initial reaction was predictable. People made pot jokes on twitter and used stoner puns in headlines.

My question is: When can we have a grown-up conversation about medical marijuana?

ZILLER: Let’s do it now.

To be honest, I’m surprised I was surprised to hear Kerr tried marijuana as a pain remedy. As you say, it’s perfectly logical. In addition, Kerr is progressive and open-minded. Given the medical community’s increasing belief that marijuana can help certain patients, it’d make perfect sense that he’d give it a try. It’s unfortunate that it didn’t work.

It’s weird that we’re getting to a discussion about the opioid crisis and painkiller addiction via Kerr’s comments on marijuana. This should be a discussion regardless. Not being around NBA locker rooms, I don’t know exactly how pervasive high-end painkillers are — I’m more familiar with ice baths, hot tubs, and the ol’ training table — but if Kerr’s suggesting that team doctors are passing out Vicodin and Oxycontin like Tic Tacs, that’s a huge conversation the NBA community needs to have. This isn’t a contact sport, but we know these players spend most of the season sore. How educated are players on the dangers of habitual painkiller use, and who is making sure abuse isn’t happening?

That’s the conversation we need, in my opinion.

FLANNERY: To be fair, I believe Kerr was talking about the NFL being a pain-pill league far more than the NBA. There is pain in pro basketball, obviously, although it tends to be less acute and more chronic. But I don’t want to generalize too much on the nature of pain.

I have no doubt that athletes will take anything and everything that will help them get over the pain, especially if it’s prescribed by a doctor. Look at Bill Walton. He resisted painkillers for years and finally succumbed to the pressure being put on him by team doctors, management, media, and fans. It damn near wrecked his career, if not his life. That was 40 years ago. How much more enlightened are we as a society at this point?

I don’t know all the ins and outs of medical marijuana. But I do think it should be considered seriously, particularly since we do know it’s far less invasive.

ZILLER: It’s interesting that, in response to Kerr’s comments, the league noted that it allows medical use on a case-by-case condition despite the anti-drug measures laid out in the collective bargaining agreement. Despite that, it seems clear Kerr didn’t ask permission and could have just simply tested positive. That would have made for a different conversation.

The testing regime is weird in this sense: as you say, our country is facing an opioid abuse crisis. The league can’t test for recreational opioid use because team doctors are probably prescribing Oxy regularly. So how do you guard against abuse of those drugs? If you can’t, why are you even trying to guard against recreational marijuana use? (I’d note here that I find it interesting that veterans seem to get nailed on those telltale five-game weed suspensions as often as young players.)

I found Earl Watson’s contribution to the conversation interesting. His point was that while Kerr extols the potentially safer pain-killing properties of marijuana, teenage players in pain can’t afford the risk. Kerr risks little if anything by trying weed as a pain remedy. In most states, a young person can derail his life by doing the same and getting caught.

FLANNERY: Watson’s comments were interesting and need to be examined more closely. I saw headlines that ran with the phrase “slippery slope” and assumed that he was talking about marijuana as a gateway drug. That that wasn’t his point at all. That’s how deeply embedded the rhetoric is in our subconscious.

Watson’s point is well taken. Young black men are way more likely to have legal problems from marijuana than white kids. Even in states that have decriminalized possession, black people get arrested at three to four times the rate as whites. There’s no room for experimentation when one false move can cost you everything.

That’s another reason why this conversation is so important to have. There’s been a slight turn away from punitive to compassionate measures in our drug laws. Again, that’s a direct result of the opioid epidemic. Our marijuana laws are somewhere in between absolute tolerance and complete prohibition on a state-by-state basis.

It’s confusing, for one, and sends all kinds of mixed messages to not just kids, but everyone. It’s not surprising that the NBA doesn’t want to talk about it because few entities are taking the lead on this issue. It makes me wonder if Kerr has taken too big a bite out of the apple.

ZILLER: On one hand, he was cautious in talking specifically about medical use. He didn’t pry open the can of worms labeled “recreational use.” On the other hand, the NBA probably isn’t ready to start talking about medical use right now, as the legalization map expands and as collective bargaining wraps up.

This would be much trickier had the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in August decided to essentially decriminalize medical marijuana — or marijuana entirely — in states where it is legal. The fact that marijuana possession still violates federal law, even if that means little to users in an increasing number of states, gives the NBA plenty of reason to maintain a hard line. The NBA as a business has just about no incentive to push the envelope here.

The story is different when viewed through the prism of doing what’s best for players. I wonder if now that this is out there, more players will ask for medical marijuana prescriptions and league drug test waivers. The problem there is relief for acute pain vs. chronic pain, and whether the patchwork nature of even medical marijuana law creates an unfair advantage for teams in states where it’s legal.

FLANNERY: It’s so easy to get pulled down into a spiral on this.

There’s a point to be made that recreational marijuana use has been proven to be far less harmful than alcohol consumption. Even the terminology there is weird. Do we call knocking back shots at the bar recreation? No, we call it getting loaded, but that’s perfectly fine as long as you don’t get behind the wheel. Smoke a joint and you’re looking at five games. That’s bizarre.

As you say, the feds could have helped clarify this back in August and chose not to. That’s not black or white either. There are legalization advocates who were wary about what was on the table last summer.

So, let’s refocus. Kerr started the conversation and pointed to the new collective bargaining agreement as a possible entry point. That’s a little late in the game, frankly, as a new CBA seems imminent. Where would you like to see the conversation go from here?

ZILLER: Good question. Clarification from the league on their policies when it comes to waivers on prescribed marijuana use would be useful. I think that’d help address Watson’s concerns as well. Show that this is not a casual thing so long as the federal prohibition is in place.

We also need to know more about how the league’s rules apply to chronic pain relief and I’d love to see, in the wake of Kerr’s comments, a big independent study of the league’s pain relief prescription practices.

The league office is smattered with old retired players with particularly achy joints. Surely there’s some interest in finding out how to protect players and the league while allowing the most effective, safe treatments possible.

FLANNERY: Yes, we need more studies. For many reasons beyond the scope of this conversation, funding for medical marijuana studies has been scarce. As it stands, most of the evidence in favor of or against medical marijuana is anecdotal. Many ordinary people have found it helpful. Kerr suggested that his attempt didn’t alleviate his pain. Neither is an absolute.

In an ideal world, the sports leagues and unions could fund a joint effort in the name of athlete health. This comes back to the stigma attached to marijuana, which Kerr noted in his comments. No league wants to be thought of as a bunch of potheads, as Kerr put it, but isn’t that better than a bunch of pill poppers?

ZILLER: The league should want to be thought of as one that bases policy on facts and reason instead of potential stigma, to be sure.