i've gotta give credit to boston for some great defense (at times) but for me, this series is just further proof that something is amiss in the NBA. i feel like the C's were clearly not the best team in the league this year, but here they are winning the finals.
now i know shashers not gonna argue, he's too busy eating a live fish at boys club (gross!) but i'd like to hear from you Cs fans.
can you REALLY say that you think they are the best team in the league this year? i felt like at times, they had a VERY sound defensive unit, but just as often, they look confused or not focused. no?
i mean, richard called it out at the beginning of the season. as soon as they got KG, richard said "rings". (bravo) but i think even richard would agree that their schedule was total baloney.
does that mean anything to Cs fans/players/the rest of the world? if not, how do i make sure my team has a baloney schedule next year? =)
and if so, what penalty is there for having a bs schedule? its not like the rings are going to sparkle less brightly just because the guys wearing em beat a bunch of paper opponents to get into the finals. i feel like im taking crazy pills. didn't the HAWKS repeatedly abuse the Cs in ATL?
the hawks. the atlanta isotopes. and how long was it before the Cs won a road game this post season? 3rd rd?
(for this next line, pretend it's seinfeld saying it. just humor me)
and whats the deal with these NBA referees!?
am i alone here or is it getting worse? something's gotta give. i thought jimi/shasher brought up a good point the other day:
there's easily 5 or 6 blown calls a game (i'd say thats conservative, wouldn't you?) and most games are decided by less than 12 pts.
so, if the avg margin of error is as big or bigger than the avg margin of victory, doesn't that mean it's broken?
and if anybody tells me it will all come out in the wash, i will vomit on my keyboard right now.
what do you assholes think? are the Cs legitimate champs? is the NBA broke? is the reffing fair/consistent enough? is it at least as fair/consistent as other major sports?
i know this is a long and scatterbrained post, but i figure it's prolly my last one of the season, so i'm going out with a bang.
17 comments:
Yea, these refs are messed up. Truly the league is up to no good. If you watch these games, I feel its pretty obvious that they try to control the pase of the game.
Now, that is really devious, because a ref controlling the pace of the game doesn't have to call fouls one sided. He can call bad fouls on either team OR not call obvious fouls on either team, and still control the pace. So, to a casual observer, it can appear to be balanced, when in fact, they are driving one team to victory.
BUT, you can throw that whole theory away when you look at the 35-10 disparity in game 2. That was messed up.
Oh, just to be totally clear here, I am just taking a bite out a live fish. No eating will be taking place. Oh gods, why am I so stupid as to go against the league?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/5832413.html
Fuck you Stern! You better do something.
"Oh, just to be totally clear here, I am just taking a bite out a live fish. No eating will be taking place."
I guess that's fair, but to be honest, when i made the bet, i was totally implying and intended to eat that bite. But that what was my bet, totally different.
=====================
I don't think it make it makes a lot of sense to regard a teams regular season when determining its championship status. To me, being the champs should be about who is the best over a seven game series in the month of June.
I seriously doubt, if LA loses this series, they are gonna say, "It's not fair, we would have beat them if they didn't have such easy opponents in the prior rounds." Such an opinion would be not only lame, but plain wrong. Not even a pro athelete would think it.
Besides Boston struggled in every round, and LAL for the most part, made quick work of everybody. So the implied argument of the complaint, "they had easier opponents, we had harder ones," namely that one team is unfatigued, uninjured, and the other team fatigued and battleworn, does not make sense given how things played out.
=================
"i felt like at times, they had a VERY sound defensive unit, but just as often, they look confused or not focused. no?"
I think this was a lot of teams this year. In the finals, it has definately been as much, if not more LA, than Boston. Game five had tons of defensive lapses by both teams, though boston's were mainly in the first quarter.
===========================
Most the season i have thought, but never said, that there is not any great teams this year. It's hard to downplay the west against such universal fawning. Plus, anytime i started typing out a generalization of the West, i'd be reminded of all the generlizations of the East and get turned off the idea.
The West did seem like it was the strongest i can remember. But i think that statement is more true for the whole conference than the cream of the crop. I don't think this year's best teams are the best the west has ever seen by any means.
I think the west had a bunch of really good and good teams. I think the East had a couple really good teams. But no team was good enough to really play well consistantly. Every team i've watched this year has had spells where they play inexplicably bad and just make wrong plays. Everyone has had a bit of Pistonitis this postseason.
Where is the team that starts the post season saying, "Fo, Fo, Fo," then backs it up. I haven't seen championship execution on defense or offense from any team consistantly. Just flashes of it. And i am not talking about cold shooting as a result of turned up defense. I mean plain bad execution. From Boston, LAL, everybody. Most recent examples: first quarter of game 5, every Laker had a layup. In the 2nd half, there where several uncontested layups by Boston. Gasol was like 3 steps late on help defense when Allen went past..damn i forget who that was.
So to answer your Question, i think if Boston wins it, they are as legitimate as anyone. To me, this years championship was about a 5-6 team crap shoot. Each team somewhat equally with no real favorite, no great team at the forefront.
============
By "blown calls," do you just mean calls made that are wrong, or does that also include calls that weren't made? If you also mean calls not made, i would say well over 100 calls (also conservative) are missed a game. But in hockey, i would say over 300 penealties are not called:D
I was laughing comparing the rules in the NBA and NHL while watching playoffs this year. You throw one fist at a guy, even if it misses, you are suspended for 1 or many more games. In hockey, you can throw 30 fists at a guy, and you get a 5:00 major penelty. That is kinda hilarious. I'm not commenting in judgment in anyway, just say the it's amusing switching back and forth in May and seeing the contrast.
hahaha, some laugh-out-loud bits of bad journalism in here.
"The officiating was so bad that night that it was mentioned the next morning in newspapers around the country."
"Lakers coach Phil Jackson didn't exactly clear the issue up when he used words like 'stolen' and 'suspicious' to describe calls in that 2002 series."
And did he just forget to give the name of the "coach" he was quoting at length?
Not that he didn't make good points, but crappy writing. No personally offense. It is a step up from all but one of the four or so journalists that write about the Pistons in the Detroit Free Press.
Newspaper writers are a joke in general. That's part of what was so funny about that first qoute. It was even mentioned in newspapers!!
A week ago i sent a letter to the editor of the Free Press, for intentionally printing misinformation in the headlines of articles in an attempt to increase readership. I know it is a common practice, but that move makes me sick, and they do it constantly there. If the misinforming headlines are successful, the reader will read the article, then see that the headline was a lie. So that can hardly encourage long-term customer sales.
Wow, that was off-topic. Well, it is a blog.
"I don't think it make it makes a lot of sense to regard a teams regular season when determining its championship status. To me, being the champs should be about who is the best over a seven game series in the month of June."
but, (especially in this case) the reg season record determines homecourt advantage, which was HUGE this year as it is most years. so, to not consider it, i think, is not taking into account the whole picture. sure, team A may be the best team of a 7 game series in june, but... come on. if team A had a tougher schedule, and in turn a worse record, they would have WAY less of a chance of winning ANY of the series's they won, right?
however, i think you're right about no bad ass teams. i agree that it was pretty much a 5-6 team crap shoot, but having homecourt throughout is HUGE. and that is directly related to reg season.
oh yea, and by blown calls, i mean no calls also. i think that is just as big/bigger than an incorrect call.
in fact, missed calls probably promotes all the BS player behavior more than incorrect calls. with the type of behavior this shit is nurturing, i have a hard time getting upset with players for their actions.
i believe it was our old friend ICE-T who once coined the adage:
"Don't hate the player, hate the game."
as true today, i think, as when it was written.
Tom, i think you misunderstood what the result of having a cake schedule is. Its not about being rested. Its about having home-court advantage. And, if you haven't been paying attention, the League wants the home team to win.
I also can't agree that the teams this year weren't good.
Also, I'm holding to my pace killer refs as the main reason teams can't get their head on straight.
As for that writer, you're right, he sucks. But I feel in total agreement with his statement that the League is on the verge of pushing its teams into apathy. I know I'm really close.
Do something Stern, or get out!
Oh, and quit it with the long posts...I can't build up the will power to read all that =)
i dunno man. i'm not saying there were no good teams, just that no one team stood out as SUPER bad ass.
i really feel like the top 5 were pretty close
My bad, when i read, "its not like the rings are going to sparkle less brightly just because the guys wearing em beat a bunch of paper opponents to get into the finals," it sounded to me like we were talking about the playoffs, not the regualr season. and that is mainly what i was referencing.
==========
Sorry my post is more than your puny will power can handle. Just skip mine, it is mostly blah blah blah anyway. If i didn't have to respond to 10 topics on one thread, it would be much shorter. Think of each ============= as a new post. Wrap your will power around that.
================
I didn't say there were no good teams. Actually, I said quite the opposite of that. I said there were several very good teams. I don't think there are "great" teams this year. The best teams this year, haven't even been playing together for more than a season, and it shows. The team most likely to win it all at this moment, sometimes seems clueless on which PG they shoudl be playing. Not that Rondo isn't playing good. But his liabilities are really big problems at times.
==============
Btw, yeah than, there are waaaayyyy more missed calls than 12per game. There is at least one violation not called every possession. Some would say every dribble by some guys is a carry, so that is like 12 violations on each possession:D
"The team most likely to win it all at this moment, sometimes seems clueless on which PG they shoudl be playing. Not that Rondo isn't playing good. But his liabilities are really big problems at times."
that shit is hilarious! too true
Without thoroughly reading the above posts, and I am a Spurs fan all the way, winning the championship is not about being the best team. It is about NOT being the worst team at the end. Having the "weakest" schedule has just as much to do with who you HAVE to play as it does with those few games that the league actually has to schedule. Of 82 games, 16 are division games, 30 are conference, and 30 are opposing conference. That's 76 of 82 games. If you think those 6 league scheduled games are going to make your SoS go from 1 to 30, that is insane. I admit it will have an impact, maybe dropping like 5 in SoS. Boston't SoS would probably be 15 AT BEST. The East sucked royally. The only real contenders were the top 4 seeds. Even if Boston didn't have home court, they would have been a to 4 team by default. The first round would have been another crap team (ATL played well, but they are still young and athletic, not battle tested). Just like the Heat got lucky and won their title, Boston got lucky to win theirs. If they are the best team or not doesn't matter. Having home court DID matter, but they won the East by 7 games. Detroit was the only team close enough to catch them, but the league can only "schedule" 6 games. That is too close of a margin for a conspiracy in my opinion. Now, do I feel some things were fixed, hell yeah! But home court wasn't one of them. (Puts on flame-retardant, Patrick-repelling jacked)
boston's SoS was 2nd easiest in the league. regardless of why that is (we can blame it on conspiracy, or the east sucking*, or both, or whatever), they ended up with homecourt over everyone (not just other eastern teams) by beating weaker teams than EVERY western contender, in the regular season AND the playoffs.
right?
*boston was the only team in it's division above .500, so those 16 division games were pretty much gimmes, right? whereas 3 of the 5 teams in LA's division (which isn't even the toughest division!) were above .500. considering the 9 game disparity between their records, i think it's easy to imagine those teams switching places at the beginning of the season and BOS ending up withOUT homecourt advantage.
right?
imagine if boston switched places with NOH (10 game disparity), who was in a division with a whopping 4 of 5 teams over .500!
Well Patrick... this is a long one:
I agree 100% that Boston having home court made a huge difference for them. I agree that they had a "cake" schedule. All I'm saying is that it doesn't add up to a conspiracy, that's just the way it happened to be this year. Boston got lucky to have the players they had and play against the teams they did to get home court. You can't dictate the ability of your opponents. It is unfair to say that they didn't deserve what they got because they were in a JV league that they had 0 control over being placed in. The league can't control injuries, they can't control shots falling, and they can't control player/coach mindsets.
Also remember that Boston didn't suck last year. They had a bad record, but they were also the most injured team. They were a playoff team before everyone got hurt last year. That "biggest turnaround in history" is crap. Just like when SA drafted Duncan. Robinson went down for the whole year and they won the lottery. I love SA, but that was the same situation, a strong playoff team (though not championship caliber yet) that got lucky in the offseason.
So, to answer your initial questions:
"are the Cs legitimate champs? " - Yes. (Are they the best team? Entering the playoffs: not a chance. After completely raping the Lakers: yes)
"is the NBA broke?" - The NBA is very broken, but it has just as much to do with drafting high school kids and not teaching basketball as it does with bad refs and bad rules.
"is the reffing fair/consistent enough?" - (get ready to vomit on your keyboard!) having played, coached, and reffed, it is one of the hardest jobs to do. I think it is in worse shape than years before, but I think a vast majority of calls/no-calls are legit. It's the minority that get noticed. If you want to look at why games are won/lost, you can look at the first 5 minutes of the 3rd quarter. You can look at the defensive effort of teams, the use/lack of hustle, the mental focus, execution. Lots of people say "the first half doesn't matter", well... it does. EVERYTHING that happens from the tip to the buzzer affects the outcome of the game weather people want to accept it or not. Look at Detroit and SA. They aren't the most talented teams, but they are the most focused teams, and even the "conspiracy" couldn't keep both teams out of the conf finals.
"is it at least as fair/consistent as other major sports?" - It is what it is. I think it was Chuck Daly or Don Nelson (or maybe Bob Knight :)) who said "If you play/coach long enough, all the calls balance out". There are always going to be bad calls because the refs are human. Enough bad calls will naturally get sorted out due to press, sales and ratings dropping, etc.
i hear you, captain. and i agree. it's unfair to question the legitimacy of the C's rings. they won.
i'm not mad at boston for the things that were out of their control, but i am upset at the league for not fixing what i think are easily fixed problems.
i dont necessarily buy into the conspiracy thing, but you said it- it is what it is. its not boston's fault they were in the JV league, but it's the nba's fault that there is a JV league.
and as far as the refs, i know it's a hard job, but if you tell me that joey crawford and dick bavetta are the most capable guys on the planet to be doing that job, i will vomit on the pile of vomit that is on my keyboard right now.
"and as far as the refs, i know it's a hard job, but if you tell me that joey crawford and dick bavetta are the most capable guys on the planet to be doing that job, i will vomit on the pile of vomit that is on my keyboard right now."
Please don't! It's bad for your esophagus!
I think this is another issue of "not being the worst at the end". From what I understand, the refs that get the Finals have the "best" rating over the season. So the 3 guys that didn't get "caught" the most win out.
And I did know I was responding to you Jake, I was trying to give Patrick warning about another long post, but I clearly failed in relaying that effort! :)
I can accept that the league is responsible for the EXISTENCE of the JV league. If they just quit drafting these knucklehead boys and actually draft men that play basketball things will be a lot better. I honestly don't see things changing until then. Who's going to say "Man, I gotta see that game between Carmello and Amare! Those guys are awesome!"? There is too much money, immaturity, and ignorance to keep things moving forward.
CELTICS SUCK!!!
Post a Comment