It should have been more.

	Did Dan Issel deserve more than a four-game suspension? David Aldridge thinks so.

And it should have been done by the league.

This is not to say that the Nuggets' action against Dan Issel wasn't swift, or telling. Management, from owner Stan Kroenke to general manager Kiki Vandeweghe, in their first big tests, passed muster. No NBA team has ever suspended a player or a coach for a racially sensitive remark. And this will cost Issel a lot more than the $25,000 John Calipari was fined by the league for using similar language in disparaging a beat reporter for the Newark Star-Ledger four years ago, or the $2,500 that a Miami Heat radio announcer received for some ill-conceived remarks concerning Thomas Jefferson, slaves and basketball.

But it didn't go far enough. On matters like these, the league's condemnation trumps the team's embarrassment. The league, as it did with Latrell Sprewell, could decide that the team's punishment isn't enough of a censure. As far as the NBA Coaches' Association was aware on Wednesday, while there hasn't been much precedent for a double penalty by both a team and league against a coach, there's no standing rule against it, either.

I am not saying, by the way, that Issel should have been fired by the Nuggets. The standards by which employees are hired and/or retained in a private company are almost always up to that company to decide. Now, if Kroenke had decided to cashier Issel, I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But he didn't. Nor am I saying the league should have fired him; I'm not sure the league could fire him if it wanted. Vandeweghe's remarks on Wednesday were persuasive, to a point; a man's life and contributions to his community should be part of the context of decisions such as these. (But not the only context.)

But I am saying that the Nuggets are, by definition, a member of the National Basketball Association. And as such, the league can, and does, set rules of behavior by which its members must comply. It does so for players in every standard player contract. Players can't take certain drugs, for example, or they face league penalties. Players can't blow off community appearances, or face league penalties. Players can't gamble on basketball, or face league penalties.

Is it any different for coaches?

I understand that the Nuggets probably beat the league to the punch in this matter. But that wouldn't keep me, if I were the Commish, from saying the following: "We're delighted you acted so quickly in disciplining your coach. But upon our review of the matter, we feel that your punishment, while unprecedented, doesn't adequately express our revulsion at Coach Issel's comments. Yes, the suspension without pay amounts to a fine in excess of $100,000. But we're adding a game. And we're fining him $25,000, the same we fined Calipari."

And if they'd said eight games, I could live with that, too.