• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

NBA

 
 
 
You know what else made it impossible for them to win? The clock running down while the dude was rolling in the floor. Taking the deliberate technical foul gave them a chance for a comeback by stopping the block and letting them get more plays off after the Raptors missed a shot.

If you use all your time outs, it’s dumb to have a strategy which lets you stop the click to do that.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
You know what else made it impossible for them to win? The clock running down while the dude was rolling in the floor. Taking the deliberate technical foul gave them a chance for a comeback by stopping the block and letting them get more plays off after the Raptors missed a shot.

If you use all your time outs, it’s dumb to have a strategy which lets you stop the click to do that.
Click to expand...

Yea I agree, but as I said it's a trade-off. There are plenty of rules across many sports that are kind of dumb in some ways, but the best overall scenario.

Although in this case the refs probably should have had the ability to just let the clock run out.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
ronburgundy said:
Tom Sawyer said:
Yay! Go Raptors … or, I guess, Went Raptors!!!!

One thing I don't get, though. That Warriors' guy called a fake timeout with a second left on the clock and extended the game for another five minutes or so. Since they didn't have a timeout left, why did the clock stop when he called the timeout as opposed to the clock running down while he was rolling around on the ground with the ball? If that was a legal move instead of a referee screw up, the rule book should be updated to make it an illegal move where the timeout doesn't happen.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Right, that's my point. The rule book should be clear that this isn't a technical foul. It should a case of a player deciding to lie down on the floor and wave his arms around while the clock keeps running. If you use up all of your time outs, you shouldn't be able to stop the clock anymore in the middle of play.
Click to expand...

Except time outs generally need to be granted instantly. Your rule would require that every ref be constantly aware of whether each team has time outs left, and when one is requested, they first make sure that team has time outs before granting it. That's not realistic and would cause critical delays in granting time outs and errors where time outs are not granted when they should be. That is why the technical rule exists, to put the burden on each team to only call time out's when they have them, and punish them when they don't.

If you want to get rid of the deliberate attempt to stop the clock as a last resort, make the penalty for calling a non-existent time out bigger, such as the other team automatically gets 2 points plus possession under the other team's basket. Or that could be the harsher penalty when it happens with less than 10 seconds left, otherwise it's the normal penalty.
 
Yes, my rule would require that the refs be aware of whether teams have time outs left. This is not a difficult thing for them to be aware of.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
Yes, my rule would require that the refs be aware of whether teams have time outs left. This is not a difficult thing for them to be aware of.
Click to expand...

It would require that it be at the very forefront of active working memory and attention constantly, otherwise there would lead to impactful delays in granting legit time outs. That is in fact quite difficult given the amount of incoming information they are required to constantly process. You could guarantee both delays from refs having to retrieve that information from memory or look to some scoreboard indicator of it, plus false negative errors (refusal to grant a legit time out) from remembering. The current system works fine 99% of the time. It's a rare circumstance when stopping the clock outweighs the cost of the technical foul, so teams rarely do it on purpose. The final few seconds is the only time it sometimes might make sense to do it, so simply make the penalty bigger.
 
The front of active working memory to know the few times that there isn’t any time outs left? That’s not s thing that would have any difficulty at all.
 
ronburgundy said:
Tom Sawyer said:
Yes, my rule would require that the refs be aware of whether teams have time outs left. This is not a difficult thing for them to be aware of.
Click to expand...

It would require that it be at the very forefront of active working memory and attention constantly, otherwise there would lead to impactful delays in granting legit time outs. That is in fact quite difficult given the amount of incoming information they are required to constantly process. You could guarantee both delays from refs having to retrieve that information from memory or look to some scoreboard indicator of it, plus false negative errors (refusal to grant a legit time out) from remembering. The current system works fine 99% of the time. It's a rare circumstance when stopping the clock outweighs the cost of the technical foul, so teams rarely do it on purpose. The final few seconds is the only time it sometimes might make sense to do it, so simply make the penalty bigger.
Click to expand...

See, this is why we can't have basketball in Canada. Next they'll want the hoop to be exactly 3 meters high.

aa
 
Golden State lost a final due to injuries? According to some Golden State fans, injuries aren't important. Golden State also lost the last two finals without Durant.

Really a great run for Golden State. Time to get bored of another dynasty.
 
Lakers up 2-0, and with several Heat starters being hobbled, this series is in the refrigerator. Heat may get a game, but no more.

I've liked the NBA bubble season, I think they put together a better pandemic product than the other major sports, not just because of the lack of covid cases. Don't care that there are no fans. I think I may even prefer it, even if the players surely don't.

I had thought the Clippers would be the better team with Leonard and George, but even unbeatable Leonard couldn't overcome the Clipper curse. As a fan, I wasn't excited about Lakers getting Davis, never thought much of him, seemed like he got numbers as the one scorer on a bad team. But I was wrong again, he and James have great chemistry. Davis is a scoring machine. He's so smooth and graceful on the court that it's easy to think of him as soft. And he has pretty eyes.
 
blastula said:
Lakers up 2-0, and with several Heat starters being hobbled, this series is in the refrigerator. Heat may get a game, but no more.

I've liked the NBA bubble season, I think they put together a better pandemic product than the other major sports, not just because of the lack of covid cases. Don't care that there are no fans. I think I may even prefer it, even if the players surely don't.

I had thought the Clippers would be the better team with Leonard and George, but even unbeatable Leonard couldn't overcome the Clipper curse. As a fan, I wasn't excited about Lakers getting Davis, never thought much of him, seemed like he got numbers as the one scorer on a bad team. But I was wrong again, he and James have great chemistry. Davis is a scoring machine. He's so smooth and graceful on the court that it's easy to think of him as soft. And he has pretty eyes.
Click to expand...

I also thought the "bubble" worked well for the NBA, and I enjoyed the games. At first I thought the "virtual" fans were kind of creepy if not silly, but got into them a little when the announcers would point out who some of them were. Agree with you about Davis. I've always liked him. My team, the Mavericks, made a decent showing against the Clippers, even with Luka hobbled and KP out.
 
Looks like Lebron might enter a rare new category. If the Lakers win he'll be one of three players to win titles with three different teams.

Years later I'm still amazed that he managed to take down Golden State with the Cavs.
 
rousseau said:
Looks like Lebron might enter a rare new category. If the Lakers win he'll be one of three players to win titles with three different teams.

Years later I'm still amazed that he managed to take down Golden State with the Cavs.
Click to expand...

Very much agreed. One of the great performances in NBA finals history. I still rank him number 2 behind Jordan, just ahead of Kareem. How about you?
 
lol, after talking him up, Davis stinks up the place. In foul trouble, but still should have done more to get some shots. Credit to Butler for a great effort.

I expected at least one Heat win out of Laker complacency/Heat desperation. But maybe it will get competitive now.
 
Harry Bosch said:
rousseau said:
Looks like Lebron might enter a rare new category. If the Lakers win he'll be one of three players to win titles with three different teams.

Years later I'm still amazed that he managed to take down Golden State with the Cavs.
Click to expand...

Very much agreed. One of the great performances in NBA finals history. I still rank him number 2 behind Jordan, just ahead of Kareem. How about you?
Click to expand...
I think the pedestal is wide enough for them all. Jordan was awesome and to discuss whether he is the best ever is justified. But Lebron took the Cavs to the final without a Pippen. Didn't James take a dilapidated Cavs team in 2015 to 6 games in the finals with a Golden State team that could shoot 3's like other teams shoot free throws? But still, Jabbar, Russell, Jordan, James, Erving all exceeded the talent around them, even when surrounded by great talent.

I'd say Lebron James' weakness is coaching. These days the players seem less willing to listen to coaches. I doubt the Bulls win 6 titles without Phil Jackson. If the Cavs had a Phil Jackson and James was more willingly to abide by a coach, he'd have won more titles.

And to tell you how good James is, he is the only reason I'd ever want the Lakers to win. EVER!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom