2010 NBA Playoffs

Off Topic
361

Yes, it’s the back and forth scoring. Lead changes multiple times. Excellent defense and better offense culminating in a last second acrobatic shot that could result in meaning a key game win that could alter the outcome of a series, etc.

These posts are not meant to diss other sports exciting moments. I understand the argument of when there isn’t a lot of scoring and then there is one how exciting it can be.

It’s just the unique back and forth scoring of the NBA combined with a last second shot. The momentum changes you see where a team comes from 20 points down and then nails a last second shot to win the game: Priceless!

This is coming from someone who loves the NFL and MLB and will watch the hockey playoffs on occasion when the Bruins seem to have a shot. Also, since my son has been playing soccer the last couple of years and I’ve been appreciating the game more and more and will be watching the World Cup this summer.

362

[quote]randman wrote:
Yes, it’s the back and forth scoring. Lead changes multiple times. Excellent defense and better offense culminating in a last second acrobatic shot that could result in meaning a key game win that could alter the outcome of a series, etc.

These posts are not meant to diss other sports exciting moments. I understand the argument of when there isn’t a lot of scoring and then there is one how exciting it can be.

It’s just the unique back and forth scoring of the NBA combined with a last second shot. The momentum changes you see where a team comes from 20 points down and then nails a last second shot to win the game: Priceless!

This is coming from someone who loves the NFL and MLB and will watch the hockey playoffs on occasion when the Bruins seem to have a shot. Also, since my son has been playing soccer the last couple of years and I’ve been appreciating the game more and more and will be watching the World Cup this summer.[/quote]

Ok cool beans. Glad this didn’t turn into a flamefest :stuck_out_tongue:

Yeah, the back and forth is exciting and at the very least makes it very different from the more common low-scoring sport.

Since I’m already posting here, I might as well bring up other basketball-related thoughts.

Personally, I find basketball exciting, but the foul system just doesn’t work for me.
-in my mind, fouling is “cheating”, yet is a big part of the game.
-constant fouls interrupt the game.
-in some games free throws are about a 1/3 of the points. That just bothers me.
-its so hard to get the calls right. There’s a reason so many people believe the NBA is rigged, and thats because there are so many bad calls. I certainly don’t think its rigged and I know the refs are doing their best and way better than I could do.

For me, basketball would be better if free throws were worth 2 points each (so people would never foul on purpose), or the rules were changed to allow basketball to be a little bit more physical so there wouldn’t be a foul every 2 seconds.

How do you guys feel about the foul system?

363

I’m not sure there is much you can do to change it going forward. I don’t view fouling as cheating at all. I like the philosophy of not giving up an easy dunk if you’ve been beat, foul the player hard and make him earn his points at the free throw line. That being said, I do hate it when I feel like the referees are controlling the flow of the game too much.

Free throws worth 2 points each? Never going to happen. The unintended consequence of your idea is that hard fought defense would be a thing of the past. It would go from some contact to next to no contact. That would make it a pansy sport. That would get us even further away from what I consider the best era in the NBA which is the 1980s. I’d much prefer go back to 1980s NBA type basketball where touch fouls didn’t exist and the fouls that were called were actually hard fouls! It’s still a very subjective thing to call fouls no matter how many points you assign to the actual free throws.

I think in the playoffs the refs tend to get it right more than not however. I’ve watched a lot of playoff games so far this year and I haven’t noticed any games where I was thinking “the refs are getting in the way of the game”. Yes there has been a bad call or two but it didn’t change the outcome of any game. Although this does happen on occasion and it pisses me off I also still have this reaction when I watch football games from time to time. There are a lot of subjective calls in football as well.

In baseball or hockey, this isn’t a problem. Baseball because there really isn’t any contact and in hockey there’s tons of contact and it’s expected. I know there’s a lot of contact in football too but based on the position played, there are so many areas for subjective ref calls I don’t think the NBA is alone in this regard.

So to answer your post and net it out I think the foul system is ok. I think it’s incumbent upon the NBA to monitor the quality of the referee’s game calling however because they can take a well played game and interfere with it too much.

364

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
When most NBA people OUTSIDE the game (analysts, etc.) are asked who the best player is, they say LBJ. When people INSIDE the game are asked (players, coaches, etc.) they say Kobe. To me, value of inside the game > outside the game, so Kobe > LBJ.[/quote]

Good looking out T. I was gonna bring that up but hadn’t heard enough interviews this season to feel confident in doing so.[/quote]

For years now, I think the general “insider” consensus has been that Bryant is the most skilled/best player while James is the most athletic/gifted player in the game. And of course, Bryant’s All-NBA defense and seniority were also at play (remember the way everyone deferred to him during crunch time in Beijing?)

But James has really closed the gap by now. Pretty sure James got 1st-team All Defense this year and he’s in his prime while Bryant’s logged like 14+ seasons worth of games. As a result, James can get whatever shot he wants while Bryant often has to settle for tougher shots. That he makes plenty of the tough ones is noteworthy.

So it’s only a matter of time now, if it hasn’t happened already. Personally, I think that Kobe vs Lebron resembles those Magic vs Michael debates near the end of that golden age.

365

[quote]chillain wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
When most NBA people OUTSIDE the game (analysts, etc.) are asked who the best player is, they say LBJ. When people INSIDE the game are asked (players, coaches, etc.) they say Kobe. To me, value of inside the game > outside the game, so Kobe > LBJ.[/quote]

Good looking out T. I was gonna bring that up but hadn’t heard enough interviews this season to feel confident in doing so.[/quote]

For years now, I think the general “insider” consensus has been that Bryant is the most skilled/best player while James is the most athletic/gifted player in the game. And of course, Bryant’s All-NBA defense and seniority were also at play (remember the way everyone deferred to him during crunch time in Beijing?)

But James has really closed the gap by now. Pretty sure James got 1st-team All Defense this year and he’s in his prime while Bryant’s logged like 14+ seasons worth of games. As a result, James can get whatever shot he wants while Bryant often has to settle for tougher shots. That he makes plenty of the tough ones is noteworthy.

So it’s only a matter of time now, if it hasn’t happened already. Personally, I think that Kobe vs Lebron resembles those Magic vs Michael debates near the end of that golden age.
[/quote]

And you forgot to mention one “huge” fact that the other Lebron lovers on this thread get uncomfortable with and try to say it doesn’t matter when it DOES. One of these guys you speak of has 4 championships and maybe onto a 5th and one doesn’t have any and might possibly (if the stars align right) get 1 this year.

366

[quote]randman wrote:
I’m not sure there is much you can do to change it going forward. I don’t view fouling as cheating at all. I like the philosophy of not giving up an easy dunk if you’ve been beat, foul the player hard and make him earn his points at the free throw line. That being said, I do hate it when I feel like the referees are controlling the flow of the game too much.

Free throws worth 2 points each? Never going to happen. The unintended consequence of your idea is that hard fought defense would be a thing of the past. It would go from some contact to next to no contact. That would make it a pansy sport. That would get us even further away from what I consider the best era in the NBA which is the 1980s. I’d much prefer go back to 1980s NBA type basketball where touch fouls didn’t exist and the fouls that were called were actually hard fouls! It’s still a very subjective thing to call fouls no matter how many points you assign to the actual free throws.

I think in the playoffs the refs tend to get it right more than not however. I’ve watched a lot of playoff games so far this year and I haven’t noticed any games where I was thinking “the refs are getting in the way of the game”. Yes there has been a bad call or two but it didn’t change the outcome of any game. Although this does happen on occasion and it pisses me off I also still have this reaction when I watch football games from time to time. There are a lot of subjective calls in football as well.

In baseball or hockey, this isn’t a problem. Baseball because there really isn’t any contact and in hockey there’s tons of contact and it’s expected. I know there’s a lot of contact in football too but based on the position played, there are so many areas for subjective ref calls I don’t think the NBA is alone in this regard.

So to answer your post and net it out I think the foul system is ok. I think it’s incumbent upon the NBA to monitor the quality of the referee’s game calling however because they can take a well played game and interfere with it too much.[/quote]

I would LOVE LOVE LOVE for the NBA to adopt the same system as the NFL in that coaches can contest call. If they’re wrong, they should be charged a time out, this keeps the refs accountable for the calls and the coaches from blaming the refs for every game they lose and the fans feel like there is a balance to the system.

367

That’s an interesting idea but you would definitely have to limit the number of challenges like the NFL does to two a game. That way, the coaches are challenging the most important calls that could decide game outcomes. I also think the NFL should open up the red flag to more types of calls/plays. I don’t like the passing interference call not being able to be challenged. If the ref gets that one wrong, you can give a team 60 yards on a 60 yard pass and practically give them a touch down when sometimes it wasn’t interference. As long as you keep the red flags limited to two per game, this should still work out nicely.

368

[quote]randman wrote:

[quote]chillain wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
When most NBA people OUTSIDE the game (analysts, etc.) are asked who the best player is, they say LBJ. When people INSIDE the game are asked (players, coaches, etc.) they say Kobe. To me, value of inside the game > outside the game, so Kobe > LBJ.[/quote]

Good looking out T. I was gonna bring that up but hadn’t heard enough interviews this season to feel confident in doing so.[/quote]

For years now, I think the general “insider” consensus has been that Bryant is the most skilled/best player while James is the most athletic/gifted player in the game. And of course, Bryant’s All-NBA defense and seniority were also at play (remember the way everyone deferred to him during crunch time in Beijing?)

But James has really closed the gap by now. Pretty sure James got 1st-team All Defense this year and he’s in his prime while Bryant’s logged like 14+ seasons worth of games. As a result, James can get whatever shot he wants while Bryant often has to settle for tougher shots. That he makes plenty of the tough ones is noteworthy.

So it’s only a matter of time now, if it hasn’t happened already. Personally, I think that Kobe vs Lebron resembles those Magic vs Michael debates near the end of that golden age.
[/quote]

And you forgot to mention one “huge” fact that the other Lebron lovers on this thread get uncomfortable with and try to say it doesn’t matter when it DOES. One of these guys you speak of has 4 championships and maybe onto a 5th and one doesn’t have any and might possibly (if the stars align right) get 1 this year.[/quote]

You’re arguing legacy vs “best now.” And if you think the LeBron love in here is anything close to rivaling the LeBron hate you are delusional, I’m aware that you hate how the media portrays him but you’d think actual basketball fans would be able to not react by going polar opposite and acting like he’s the anti-christ. Also, there are some serious all-time greats with only 1 ring(Jerry West, Oscar Roberston, Moses Malone). But god forbid people not have 6 rings in a team sport, 100% their fault.

369

[quote]randman wrote:
That’s an interesting idea but you would definitely have to limit the number of challenges like the NFL does to two a game. That way, the coaches are challenging the most important calls that could decide game outcomes. I also think the NFL should open up the red flag to more types of calls/plays. I don’t like the passing interference call not being able to be challenged. If the ref gets that one wrong, you can give a team 60 yards on a 60 yard pass and practically give them a touch down when sometimes it wasn’t interference. As long as you keep the red flags limited to two per game, this should still work out nicely.[/quote]

I agree that the number of challenges should be limited, but even if they weren’t how many coaches are going to arbitrarily challenge calls when they have timeouts at stake if they’re wrong?? But yes they should limit it, I can’t think of a single reason not to implement this type of practice. I think it would greatly improve the game and take refs out of the equation almost completely in deciding the outcome of the game. Thats the difference with the NFL, people don’t accuse the refs of stealing games, the NBA is riddled with these accusation. Almost every NBA blog online has someone crying about the refs.

370

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:

[quote]randman wrote:
That’s an interesting idea but you would definitely have to limit the number of challenges like the NFL does to two a game. That way, the coaches are challenging the most important calls that could decide game outcomes. I also think the NFL should open up the red flag to more types of calls/plays. I don’t like the passing interference call not being able to be challenged. If the ref gets that one wrong, you can give a team 60 yards on a 60 yard pass and practically give them a touch down when sometimes it wasn’t interference. As long as you keep the red flags limited to two per game, this should still work out nicely.[/quote]

I agree that the number of challenges should be limited, but even if they weren’t how many coaches are going to arbitrarily challenge calls when they have timeouts at stake if they’re wrong?? But yes they should limit it, I can’t think of a single reason not to implement this type of practice. I think it would greatly improve the game and take refs out of the equation almost completely in deciding the outcome of the game. Thats the difference with the NFL, people don’t accuse the refs of stealing games, the NBA is riddled with these accusation. Almost every NBA blog online has someone crying about the refs.[/quote]

I don’t think it would work anyways, because even on replay calls still have some subjectivity. What is incidental contact, is that too much body defending the post, was that a hand check or not. The NFL doesn’t allow challenges on penalties, which is essentially what you are asking for. They basically already implemented the NFL challenge system with no red flags, because the refs are allowed to go to the monitor on any boundary call or timing call.

371

By the way, does anyone else think there is a huge risk regarding Lebron wanting to guard Rondo tonight? If Paul Pierce has any pride whatsoever he needs to take it to the Cavs tonight if that happens. I mean, this guy was the finals MVP two seasons ago and had the audacity to say he was better than Kobe Bryant. No team would ever take their best defender off Bryant during a postseason game.

I’m just saying…

372

[quote]red04 wrote:
I don’t think it would work anyways, because even on replay calls still have some subjectivity. What is incidental contact, is that too much body defending the post, was that a hand check or not. The NFL doesn’t allow challenges on penalties, which is essentially what you are asking for. They basically already implemented the NFL challenge system with no red flags, because the refs are allowed to go to the monitor on any boundary call or timing call.[/quote]
There is a world of difference between the Refs choosing which plays to be reviewed and the coaches choosing which plays to be reviewed!!

Randman.

When I read that I thought the same thing… Pierce should be embarrassed. Even if the Cavs played the Lakers and Derek Fisher had a blow away game and scored a quadruple double, I doubt they would take a defender off Bryant and put him on Fish. Bryant is way too consistently dangerous, it just shows that Pierce is a diminnishing threat, maybe he can prove them wrong and have a blow away game, but I have my doubts. Only time will tell.

373

So what are the predictions for tonights game??? I’ve got my money on the celtics!

374

Question for the thread: we talk about Kobe and how great his offensive game is. But how about his defense? I know he’s made five straight all-NBA Defensive teams (along with five straight all-NBA teams), but do you think his defense is all that good? Would you consider him a lockdown defender?

375

[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:
So what are the predictions for tonights game??? I’ve got my money on the celtics![/quote]

As much as I want to see the Celtics win this game and the series, I have to go with Cleveland. I think the Celts will win game 6 and Cleveland game 7 unfortunately. I hope I’m wrong and you’re right.

376

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
Question for the thread: we talk about Kobe and how great his offensive game is. But how about his defense? I know he’s made five straight all-NBA Defensive teams (along with five straight all-NBA teams), but do you think his defense is all that good? Would you consider him a lockdown defender?[/quote]

Kobe is the type of defender that will make you WORK and WORK and WORK. He doesn’t get lazy, he doesn’t fall asleep, he’s on you. Different player skillsets require different type of defending, you can’t always body up the way artest does. Kobe understands this, and although he may not “lock” everyone he defends down, he does make them work and guards them aggressively with intelligence. Kobe is still the best defender on the Lakers, IMO Artest has never been a better defender than Kobe, he may have been defender of the year, but to me Kobe’s greater understanding of the dynamics of the game make him a far better defender, if he had Artests size and strength he’d be a true lock down defender IMO.

377

Andrew, Celtics up 15 pts in the 3rd qtr? Could this b happening? We’ll see.

378

Unless he has the best 4th quarter in NBA history LeBron gonna the goat for sure now, just not the goat we’ve been talking about.

379

You heard it from me first! =D As long as they can continue to contain James we should be alright!!

380

Dude, 24 point lead with 9 minutes to go!!!