- 37,356
- 39,088
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
Wow...this might be at 90 pages. I can't wait till tonight. This thread needs to be locked.
Official 2008 NBA Finals Game 2 Thread: Lakers @ Boston 6/8 6PM PST Game On ABC HD
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by kidskillz858,
- Start date
- 1,136
- 34
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
I agree with all saying the Celtics are a great/good defensive team. You combine their great defense with being able to grab offensive players arms when theyare going for layups and not being called or non calls for contact on players catching lobs for scores and you have an unstopable force. It just wasnt a fairlycalled game and beyond the expected home court advantage.
At least the game started out with the Celtics being called for moving picks early on (something they got away with all game 1 with KG or PJ Brown leaning intoscreens) but other then that it clearly stacked in the Celtics favor.
The Lakers are an ok defensive team but when you take away clean blocks because of contact after the shot is released or ticky-tack touch calls that canliterally be called on every play then you hamper the Lakers attempts at being as agressive as the Celtics.
At least the game started out with the Celtics being called for moving picks early on (something they got away with all game 1 with KG or PJ Brown leaning intoscreens) but other then that it clearly stacked in the Celtics favor.
The Lakers are an ok defensive team but when you take away clean blocks because of contact after the shot is released or ticky-tack touch calls that canliterally be called on every play then you hamper the Lakers attempts at being as agressive as the Celtics.
- 726
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
The NBA is a joke. They finally had a chance to get back on the right track, they were handed a Lakers-Celtics finals. But we're not talking about goodbasketball, we're still talking about garbage referees. I don't watch games to see referees make statements or gamble. People try to blame it on theplayers for the league losing popularity. But how can anyone take this league seriously when they watch this crap.
- 88,323
- 47,351
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
how hard is it to watch games? did you not know that Utah led the league in fouling?
- 12,102
- 1,410
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- 88,323
- 47,351
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
Originally Posted by Seymore CAKE
AHEM!!!... Kevin Garnett...Originally Posted by NobleKane
Why am i not mad that the lakers are down 0-2 being a laker fan? Simple. I am not one of these gullable niketalkers who think the nba ISNT fixed... I knew it was from day one of this season and how boston all of a sudden became the number 1 defensive team in the nba. NOBODY except for posey was noted for being an excellent defender...and all of a sudden they become the best defensive team in the league? even stevie wonder could see whats going on...
- 9-time All-Defensive:
NBA Defensive Player of the Year: 2008
- First Team: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008
- Second Team: 2006, 2007
1 word. Overrated
and uh......i suppose you are gonna tell me that the t wolves have been the best defensive team for the last 8 years right?
- 88,323
- 47,351
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
I think alot of you are in denial because the sport you love is fixed. hey if you can watch movies, wrestling, baseball, etc, you can watch the new andimproved fixed nba...
its been like this since 2002. get used to it.... its entertainment..... stern is gonna do whatever he can to make more money even if that means helpingeastern conference teams win every other year...
its been like this since 2002. get used to it.... its entertainment..... stern is gonna do whatever he can to make more money even if that means helpingeastern conference teams win every other year...
- 12,102
- 1,410
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
So why would the Spurs win titles?
Why would only 1 NBA Finals go 7 games the past 14 or so years?
Why would only 1 NBA Finals go 7 games the past 14 or so years?
- 2,149
- 759
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2006
i hate luke walton.
- 88,323
- 47,351
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
The league does not need series to go 6 or more games anymore to make money like it did in previous decades . for small market teams in the finals,the shorter the better.
In the spurs case they are the alternating western conference team. There is no need to promote the west because everybody knows its the better and dominatingconference... For the east however thats a different story....
They do this to repair the image of the eastern conference as being the weak conference... someone says "the west is way better" then an east fan cansay "then why did the heat win it last year?" its a really good marketing strategy if you think about it...
This series will go either 2 ways. 1. The celtics will wrap it up in 5. or 2. the league will go for the homerun and have it go 7 with boston winning...
either way it will go as the celtics 2008 champs winning and next year these same two teams will meet and the lakers will get the revenge. its so cliche....but stern got everyone eating out the palm of his hand because people dont want this sport to be similar to the steroids scandal in baseball...
ive always said if a team is good enough, they can overcome rigged officiating and mess things up ie jordan vs the jazz in the 90's BUT when you have afree throw discrepancy of 40 to 10? Thats way too much for even the great Michael jordan to overcome
- 2,717
- 227
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2001
Enough said right here:
Posted by Anonymous (scroll down to the 2nd comment.) He does a good job of using shot charts to show that the idea being spouted by various members of themedia, i.e. the Celtics were the more aggressive team and the Lakers didn't get calls because they were shooting jump shots, is a fallacy. He also pointsout the shooting foul discrepancy (17 to 3), which counters the argument being made by some that the Lakers only committed 7 more fouls than the Celtics andthus the officiating wasn't really that one-sided.
"The problem was that the Lakers weren't playing significantly less aggressively than the Celtics, and still got hosed. It's one thing to seeteams get the short end of the stick and retreat into a shell. The Lakers, though, continued to go to the rack. Check the shot charts for Lamar Odom and PauGasol:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/shotchart?gameId=280608002
Pretty much every shot is in the paint or just outside it - between the two of them, they took 23 shots. 18 of them were within 5 feet of the hoop. They shot 1foul between them. Look at the comparable shot chart for KG - 2 shots in the paint. 4 free throws. There's getting hosed, and then there'sinexplicable.
Don't like ESPN? How about CBS: http://www.sportsline.com/nba/gamecenter/shotchart/NBA_20080608_LAL@BOS
30 shots by LA were layups or dunks. Boston had 18. Let's amend that somewhat by noting that the Celtics were the recipients of a number of 2-shot shootingfouls. They were credited with SEVENTEEN shooting fouls - LA got THREE. If we were to give every one of Boston's 2-shot fouls to the Celtics as a'layup' or 'dunk' attempt (they had 14), that gives them 32 shots at the rim. Both of LA's two-shot attempts were on layups, I believe (oneby Fisher, one by Bryant). That gives LA 32 shots at the rim. Gasol and Odom had 16 of them, and received, again, one foul shot for their troubles.
I'll reiterate simply because it bears repeating: Exactly even at the rim in shot attempts. Seventeen shooting fouls to three. On a night when the twoteams took the exact same number of shots at the rim. That's not bad, that's borderline absurd. You pretend like the officiating got better in thesecond half? First half: 19-2, Boston. Second half: 19-8, Boston. Oh good, the Lakers got 6 extra free throws. "Fouls at the end of the game"don't hold water, because LA only fouled once on Posey - let's take that out. 17-8 in the second half, despite long stretches that saw LA play more atbeing matadors than at defenders because they were trying to avoid getting called for fouls!
I don't expect LA necessarily be -ahead- in free throws. But one expects them to be within, oh, I don't know, twenty? Fifteen too much to ask, perhaps?You're calling out Odom - maybe he struggled because every time he tried to go in the lane, he got hammered or called for an offensive foul? The same istrue of Gasol, who admittedly allowed the officiating to take him out of the game - but it took him out of the game because it was so egregiously bad that heattempted 11 shots right in the paint amidst a significant amount of contact, and was rewarded with one foul shot.
Lost in all of this is the fact that Kobe actually played really well against the "Kobe stopper" Boston defense. 30 points on 23 shots is plentyefficient (that's just as efficient as 39 points on 30 shots, which was how he played in game 5 against the Spurs, when everybody couldn't stop talkingabout how well he played). He tossed in 8 assists to boot. All this despite being saddled with 3 fouls early, all of which were on the floor. I don't knowthat being "MVP" is worth the 20 or so FTAs it seemed to be against Utah, but, really, Kobe gets called for ticky-tack stuff 3x in the first halfwhile Leon Powe spends his first 10 minutes in the game shoving Pau Gasol half into the stanchion every time down the court!
The 'comeback' almost buries the story more than it should, because the fact is that the officiating killed the Lakers. It pulled Kobe out of the gameearly, and as soon as he left the early LA lead evaporated (Lakers were up by 1 when he left, were down by 8 when he returned). When he got his 3rd on yetanother nonsense call (I was unaware that being shoved into Paul Pierce by PJ Brown was considered a foul, but hey, I'm not an NBA ref - on the flipside, Ican see better than Stevie Wonder, which seems to be something they all lack), the Celtics extended a 7-point lead to 12 at the half. And you're foolingyourself if you don't think that the tight officiating (at the Lakers' end, and ONLY at the Lakers' end, for the 2nd quarter) didn't affect howLA played defense for the remainder of the game."
Posted by Anonymous (scroll down to the 2nd comment.) He does a good job of using shot charts to show that the idea being spouted by various members of themedia, i.e. the Celtics were the more aggressive team and the Lakers didn't get calls because they were shooting jump shots, is a fallacy. He also pointsout the shooting foul discrepancy (17 to 3), which counters the argument being made by some that the Lakers only committed 7 more fouls than the Celtics andthus the officiating wasn't really that one-sided.
"The problem was that the Lakers weren't playing significantly less aggressively than the Celtics, and still got hosed. It's one thing to seeteams get the short end of the stick and retreat into a shell. The Lakers, though, continued to go to the rack. Check the shot charts for Lamar Odom and PauGasol:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/shotchart?gameId=280608002
Pretty much every shot is in the paint or just outside it - between the two of them, they took 23 shots. 18 of them were within 5 feet of the hoop. They shot 1foul between them. Look at the comparable shot chart for KG - 2 shots in the paint. 4 free throws. There's getting hosed, and then there'sinexplicable.
Don't like ESPN? How about CBS: http://www.sportsline.com/nba/gamecenter/shotchart/NBA_20080608_LAL@BOS
30 shots by LA were layups or dunks. Boston had 18. Let's amend that somewhat by noting that the Celtics were the recipients of a number of 2-shot shootingfouls. They were credited with SEVENTEEN shooting fouls - LA got THREE. If we were to give every one of Boston's 2-shot fouls to the Celtics as a'layup' or 'dunk' attempt (they had 14), that gives them 32 shots at the rim. Both of LA's two-shot attempts were on layups, I believe (oneby Fisher, one by Bryant). That gives LA 32 shots at the rim. Gasol and Odom had 16 of them, and received, again, one foul shot for their troubles.
I'll reiterate simply because it bears repeating: Exactly even at the rim in shot attempts. Seventeen shooting fouls to three. On a night when the twoteams took the exact same number of shots at the rim. That's not bad, that's borderline absurd. You pretend like the officiating got better in thesecond half? First half: 19-2, Boston. Second half: 19-8, Boston. Oh good, the Lakers got 6 extra free throws. "Fouls at the end of the game"don't hold water, because LA only fouled once on Posey - let's take that out. 17-8 in the second half, despite long stretches that saw LA play more atbeing matadors than at defenders because they were trying to avoid getting called for fouls!
I don't expect LA necessarily be -ahead- in free throws. But one expects them to be within, oh, I don't know, twenty? Fifteen too much to ask, perhaps?You're calling out Odom - maybe he struggled because every time he tried to go in the lane, he got hammered or called for an offensive foul? The same istrue of Gasol, who admittedly allowed the officiating to take him out of the game - but it took him out of the game because it was so egregiously bad that heattempted 11 shots right in the paint amidst a significant amount of contact, and was rewarded with one foul shot.
Lost in all of this is the fact that Kobe actually played really well against the "Kobe stopper" Boston defense. 30 points on 23 shots is plentyefficient (that's just as efficient as 39 points on 30 shots, which was how he played in game 5 against the Spurs, when everybody couldn't stop talkingabout how well he played). He tossed in 8 assists to boot. All this despite being saddled with 3 fouls early, all of which were on the floor. I don't knowthat being "MVP" is worth the 20 or so FTAs it seemed to be against Utah, but, really, Kobe gets called for ticky-tack stuff 3x in the first halfwhile Leon Powe spends his first 10 minutes in the game shoving Pau Gasol half into the stanchion every time down the court!
The 'comeback' almost buries the story more than it should, because the fact is that the officiating killed the Lakers. It pulled Kobe out of the gameearly, and as soon as he left the early LA lead evaporated (Lakers were up by 1 when he left, were down by 8 when he returned). When he got his 3rd on yetanother nonsense call (I was unaware that being shoved into Paul Pierce by PJ Brown was considered a foul, but hey, I'm not an NBA ref - on the flipside, Ican see better than Stevie Wonder, which seems to be something they all lack), the Celtics extended a 7-point lead to 12 at the half. And you're foolingyourself if you don't think that the tight officiating (at the Lakers' end, and ONLY at the Lakers' end, for the 2nd quarter) didn't affect howLA played defense for the remainder of the game."
- 13,094
- 2,121
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2001
Originally Posted by NobleKane
and people were saying i didnt know what i was talking about as far as conspiracy. congrats to stern. this series is DONE
I said the same thing before the series started. On top of that, it has also been pointed out that PP KILLS the Lakers. He always has. Check his careernumbers against LA. His ppg against them is higher than any other team. It was crazy how so many people dismissed the C's as if they were some sort ofnovelty and didn't actually have the numbers to back up their dominance.
Ouch.
Very true though. Karma is a mutha it seems.
I agree with this to an extent. You have JVG whining about adding extra fouls.
- 9,086
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2006
if there's one thing i've learned about the nba this season, it's that jvg don't bite his tongue for no one
- 697
- 55
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2005
True story
I will say the celtics outplayed us and took game 1.They earned it. If you go back to my game 1 post I'll say that the officiating wasn't a problem. Wewere just trash. But...
Game 2 on the other hand was just disgusting. Celtics basically having their way on defense just makes their !!%$ 10x stronger
People are like "well the Lakers need to take it inside"
- 3,995
- 44
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
This is hilarious.
The NBA wants shorter series because they are fine with making less money than they could in a longer series. Right. It's not like they're in thebusiness of making money or attracting new viewers or anything.
And it's in their best interests to have a small market city make the NBA Finals when advertising revenue is based on ratings and San Antonioconsistently draws poor ratings. Of course, the NBA has no interest in wanting lesser-watched series extend to 7 games to make up for the decreased revenue.Sure.
The NBA would like there to be parity between conferences but it really doesn't amount to much in terms of marketing. The Jordan-era Bulls made theEastern Conference dominant and the league enjoyed their highest ratings and huge profits. The Lakers made the Western Conference the top dog and the NBAprofited from them too even though there was a huge disparity in talent between conferences.
In the end the NBA wants two things: a marketable player and a big market team. That's why the Spurs are the NBA's worst nightmare, evidenced by thefact that their Finals appearances are always one of the least watched series in the league's history.
I enjoy a conspiracy theory as much as the next guy but at least come up with some facts to back yours up.
- 10,884
- 19
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2006
- 4,081
- 67
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
darthska
Staff member
- 44,188
- 27,754
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
I just realized something earlier that I don't like: it would be way too obvious for the Lakers to get home calls in L.A. Obviously, the league wants toprotect it's image. I mean, can we agree on that? Every league out there wants to protect the image of their league.
Well how tainted would the NBA look if the Lakers get all the calls in L.A.? That would be fair, but it wouldn't be good for the league. It would meake itobvious to everyone that the same exact plays at home are going to be called different than if they were to happen on the road.
The NBA doesn't want that kind of predictability on their image. It's like, picture yourself an alcoholic... TRYING to quit. I make a bet with a friendthat even though you haven't drank in 48 days, if I leave a 6-pack in front of your apartment door, you'll drink it. YOU OVERHEAR ME MAKE THIS BET, butyou didn't tell me about it, and you didn't tell the guy I bet.
SO that changes things COMPLETELY. You know that if you take the 6-pack, you'll look bad, and that you are so predictable that someone put a bet on anaction they claim to know you'll do.
The league doesn't want to appear that predictably one-sided when it comes to home-cooking.
Like I said: just a thought I conjured up earlier... but it worries me. I can see the Celtics having the same 38-10 type, so the league can say 'See?We're consistent.' If we get something like 38-10, then people will say of the NBA 'See? You guys aren't consistent at all with your calls.Idiots. The NBA is a joke that helps the home team win with ridiculous home cooking.'
Well how tainted would the NBA look if the Lakers get all the calls in L.A.? That would be fair, but it wouldn't be good for the league. It would meake itobvious to everyone that the same exact plays at home are going to be called different than if they were to happen on the road.
The NBA doesn't want that kind of predictability on their image. It's like, picture yourself an alcoholic... TRYING to quit. I make a bet with a friendthat even though you haven't drank in 48 days, if I leave a 6-pack in front of your apartment door, you'll drink it. YOU OVERHEAR ME MAKE THIS BET, butyou didn't tell me about it, and you didn't tell the guy I bet.
SO that changes things COMPLETELY. You know that if you take the 6-pack, you'll look bad, and that you are so predictable that someone put a bet on anaction they claim to know you'll do.
The league doesn't want to appear that predictably one-sided when it comes to home-cooking.
Like I said: just a thought I conjured up earlier... but it worries me. I can see the Celtics having the same 38-10 type, so the league can say 'See?We're consistent.' If we get something like 38-10, then people will say of the NBA 'See? You guys aren't consistent at all with your calls.Idiots. The NBA is a joke that helps the home team win with ridiculous home cooking.'
- 24,717
- 23,075
- Joined
- May 17, 2007
we were outplayed.
Who cares man, we just have to regroup and take care of buisness at home.
I know for a fact we're going to get calls at home and it's going to be stupid again.
I don't want to win by getting calls, I want to win because we're the better team, not because of calls.
The Celtics have dominated on the boards this series, they have been the better team.
We'll see what happens in LA. We all know if the Lakers lose 1, the series is over
Who cares man, we just have to regroup and take care of buisness at home.
I know for a fact we're going to get calls at home and it's going to be stupid again.
I don't want to win by getting calls, I want to win because we're the better team, not because of calls.
The Celtics have dominated on the boards this series, they have been the better team.
We'll see what happens in LA. We all know if the Lakers lose 1, the series is over
darthska
Staff member
- 44,188
- 27,754
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004