NBA Playoffs Game Thread
- Thread starter JohnnyTheBone
- Start date
I cant feel too bad for the A.C.(off) Spurs
but that still was gross (ethically) and brilliant if you are Clips fan
but that still was gross (ethically) and brilliant if you are Clips fan
That was a screw job at the end. Terrible and late call against Duncan for the Paul free throws and then the bush league buzzer at the end. It's things like this that turn me off from the NBA.
That said to all the Clipper fans on the board congrats. Paul's effort and his move to score the eventual winning basket were impressive.
That said to all the Clipper fans on the board congrats. Paul's effort and his move to score the eventual winning basket were impressive.
Blacken said:
I do, but I post this every year. I love the NBA, the Spurs are a fantastic team who I dislike watching as much as most of you guys dislike LeBron. If Tim Duncan had never existed, I would have enjoyed the NBA far far far more the last two decades.
That was true until 4 or 5 seasons ago when they transitioned into a heavy motion offense with a ton of threes and early shots. The basic drop it into the post for Duncan was gone. They've been easily one of the best team to watch in the last few years.jon abbey said:
Apisith said:
Parker has always been fun in his own way, I still would rather watch about 20 other teams, including many that are far worse. It's like watching perfectly programmed soulless hoops robots for me, not trying to convince anyone else or asking anyone else to agree, just stating my perspective.
I fucking love the NBA. I know the NHL playoffs are all nailbiters but the topsy turvy scoring nature of an NBA playoff game is the more astounding inverse of hockey's equivalent. CP3 is a beast. He flops, he scowls, he whines, but Goddamn that motherfucker straight up plays great basketball.
I don't even think the Warriors will lose that many with the Spurs out and Conley and Paul and Love hurt and their great home-court advantage, I could see 5/5/5 if they stay healthy. They have been deeper than most teams all year and that gap seems even wider right now to me.
Game certainly lived up to the hype, its a good time to be an NBA fan
Carried the Clips over the finish line on a leg and half in maybe the biggest game of his career. Can he get healthy for Rd2?Soxy Brown said:
I'm going to disagree. That would have been a foul in the first quarter so it should be a foul in the fourth as well.thehitcat said:
I thought there were touch foul calls both ways with under 30 seconds to go, both resulting in two made FTs, so I didn't think that was so much of a factor, and I thought that the 'bush league buzzer' at the end was nice karmic payback for the bush league air conditioner failure in last year's Finals.
The real issue is that the league needs to seed 1-16 regardless of conference or division, because that should never have been a first round matchup.
The real issue is that the league needs to seed 1-16 regardless of conference or division, because that should never have been a first round matchup.
jon abbey said:
I thought there were plays with lots of contact both ways, no call, earlier in the game, so why suddenly call a foul after Chris Paul misses his shot? Then they basically had a makeup call at the other end. I think they did play a factor: Spurs with the ball and a tie game (if no foul call) is very different from Spurs with the ball down by 2, or after both fouls, Clippers with the ball and a tie game.
The easiest way to explain this is that there are two types of fouls called......subjective and non-subjective.jhp64 said:
An example of a subjective foul would be penetration to the basket and a certain degree of body contact to the shooter. It is up to the officials discretion as to the degree on contact and whether to blow the whistle.
The non-subjective fouls are those which a rule clearly defines as a foul as was the case on the Paul jump shot. The defender MUST allow a shooter to land safely on the floor or it is a personal foul. This is a cut and dry rule which I mentioned in the game thread when it occurred and many apparently did not understand this is the rule. There is no gray area, no subjectiveness. It was arguably the easiest call of the game since it is so clearly defined in the rules.
HomeRunBaker said:
As BigSoxFan says, not all non-subjective fouls are called every time. I'm not interested in rewatching the game, examining each non-call, but I wonder how many of those could be classified as "non-subjective". Are moving screens non-subjective? Some games (not that this was an issue last night), many of the screens look illegal to me, with the screener moving as the defender is trying to go over the top, but there is no call.
Edit: the NBA web page provided this link describing illegal screens. Looks non-subjective to me.
I really want consistency in officiating. It's like ball-strike calls: a certain pitch in the 9th inning might be a strike by the rule book, but if you've been calling it a ball all night long, why is it suddenly a strike?
San Antonio Southeast coming out hot against the King in the North. With San Antonio out, are the Hawks the most joyless team still in contention for the NBA title?
