I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but I don't enjoy the way Tony Parker plays basketball. Amare Stoudemire just "tripped" Parker ... I didn't see that. I realize Tony Parker is French, but that's not why I dislike him. He's married to Eva Longoria (soon to be the 2nd most famous sports-related Longoria?) - who cares?
While Parker is somewhat lacking as a shooter (he's never shot 80% from the FT line and has only been over 34% from 3-pt range once in his career), he is very difficult to keep out of the paint and does a good job finding open teammates off his penetration. And, when Parker is shooting well from outside, he is very difficult to guard (at least that's how it looks from the comfort of my couch).
My problem with Parker is another referee-related issue. Parker initiates contact and then flops. A good example is when he jumped perpendicular to the direction he was driving (which was straight towards the basket), hit Amare in the face with the ball, flopped, and got free throws.
I'm fine with drawing contact, but that's not what Parker does. Parker commits offensive fouls and, miraculously, gets calls from the refs to send him to the line. And, to top it off, he whines and complains about the contact. If LeBron wants to talk to the refs after being whacked across the head or being shoved with both hands by a 7-footer, fine. I don't think that's what he was hoping would happen on his drives. Parker is determining the outcome and complaining about it. It's like buying a puppy and then being distraught when it grows into a full-size dog. WTF did you think was going to happen?
Celtics v. Hawks
Why aren't the people who came off the bench in the skirmish being suspended? I thought we learned last year that there wasn't room for interpretation. Isn't that what David Stern told us about that rule? That's why Stoudemire (and Boris Diaw?) wasn't eligible for a game against the Spurs last year.
I haven't seen the incident between Garnett and Pachulia, but the ESPN ticker says Kendrick Perkins and Marvin Williams admitted to leaving the bench. Maybe they weren't moving with as much fervor as the Phoenix players did last year, but I thought that the rule was the rule. Yet another NBA ruling (or lack thereof) that makes absolutely no sense at all.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Shoving LeBron
Skip Bayless argued that Brendan Haywood was unjustly ejected from the Wizards v. Cavs game 2 on First Take this morning. While I agree with a lot of what Skip says (I might be in the minority there), I'm not in his camp on this one. Haywood is 7-footer. He was in great position (well, not so great considering who was coming down the lane ... but if it had been someone normal) to go up and challenge the shot. At that point, he has two choices: (1) he can challenge the shot and try for the block -maybe resulting in a foul - or (2) he can choose not to challenge the shot and let LBJ go unabated to the rim. Did you notice that I didn't outline an option that consists of Haywood shoving an airborne LBJ with both hands with not attempt to make a play on the ball?
While this type of play may have been common place in the late 80's and 90's, do we really want to revert to a time when teams like the Pat Riley led Knicks were a dominant force?
On a related note, I just happened to play a game of pick-up basketball last night. Most of the guys in the game were significantly shorter and smaller than I am. So, I wasn't surprised that every time I had the ball remotely close to the basket at least two of them were pushing and grabbing me to prevent me from making "easy" baskets. While I don't particularly mind getting fouled in normal basketball games, it's annoying to get flagrantly hacked every time you shoot from remotely close to the rim in pick-up games ... which is why I usually just run the point, try to create for others and shoot pull-ups and 3's. Fouls are supposed to penalize the offender. But, in pick-up games, if you nail someone so they can't shoot a lay-up, they just get the ball up top. Call me a purist, but that's not how it's supposed to be.
While this type of play may have been common place in the late 80's and 90's, do we really want to revert to a time when teams like the Pat Riley led Knicks were a dominant force?
On a related note, I just happened to play a game of pick-up basketball last night. Most of the guys in the game were significantly shorter and smaller than I am. So, I wasn't surprised that every time I had the ball remotely close to the basket at least two of them were pushing and grabbing me to prevent me from making "easy" baskets. While I don't particularly mind getting fouled in normal basketball games, it's annoying to get flagrantly hacked every time you shoot from remotely close to the rim in pick-up games ... which is why I usually just run the point, try to create for others and shoot pull-ups and 3's. Fouls are supposed to penalize the offender. But, in pick-up games, if you nail someone so they can't shoot a lay-up, they just get the ball up top. Call me a purist, but that's not how it's supposed to be.
Another reason I don't root for the Spurs
The Spurs are making a mockery of the NBA playoffs by fouling Shaq. What's worse, the refs are enabling them. Shaq just tried to dodge Brent Barry so that he wouldn't get fouled. It looked like something you'd see in a weekend flag football game, not an NBA playoff game. The fouls were obviously intentional (unless the Spurs just find Shaq irresistible - not likely), why aren't they called as such?
For all the flack the NHL has taken in recent years, at least they were proactive in making a rule change to uphold the integrity of the game. When a moron on the Rangers decided to dance in front of Devils G Martin Brodeur in order to screen him from seeing the action, the NHL made a rule change before the next contest in the series. They saw an obvious loophole and shut it off ASAP! David Stern should get a clue and do the same thing with the Hack-a-(insert name of poor FT shooter). Why wait until the off-season? Not allowing this absurd strategy (and I use that word reluctantly) doesn't favor a particular team. It favors the integrity of the game of basketball. Plus, it keeps the clock running.
Unfortunately, we've reached a point in society where people are always looking to cheat the system and get whatever advantage they can. I had to read "Teaching with Love and Logic" this semester and one of the things that stuck with me is an example about rules. One teacher had over 300 rules, each with a consequence if the rule was broken. One day, a male student threw a dead fish at one of the female students. "No throwing fish at girls" was not on the list. While obviously highly inappropriate, there wasn't a rule against it. How was the student supposed to know he wasn't supposed to throw fish at girls? I'll let you answer that one.
If Kurt Thomas fouls Shaq trying to block his shot, that's fine. Shaq gets a couple FT's (he just missed both of them). But, Brent Barry shouldn't be chasing Shaq around in the backcourt trying to grab him 50-60 feet from the basket. He doesn't have Kevin Love range, does he?
For all the flack the NHL has taken in recent years, at least they were proactive in making a rule change to uphold the integrity of the game. When a moron on the Rangers decided to dance in front of Devils G Martin Brodeur in order to screen him from seeing the action, the NHL made a rule change before the next contest in the series. They saw an obvious loophole and shut it off ASAP! David Stern should get a clue and do the same thing with the Hack-a-(insert name of poor FT shooter). Why wait until the off-season? Not allowing this absurd strategy (and I use that word reluctantly) doesn't favor a particular team. It favors the integrity of the game of basketball. Plus, it keeps the clock running.
Unfortunately, we've reached a point in society where people are always looking to cheat the system and get whatever advantage they can. I had to read "Teaching with Love and Logic" this semester and one of the things that stuck with me is an example about rules. One teacher had over 300 rules, each with a consequence if the rule was broken. One day, a male student threw a dead fish at one of the female students. "No throwing fish at girls" was not on the list. While obviously highly inappropriate, there wasn't a rule against it. How was the student supposed to know he wasn't supposed to throw fish at girls? I'll let you answer that one.
If Kurt Thomas fouls Shaq trying to block his shot, that's fine. Shaq gets a couple FT's (he just missed both of them). But, Brent Barry shouldn't be chasing Shaq around in the backcourt trying to grab him 50-60 feet from the basket. He doesn't have Kevin Love range, does he?
Friday, April 04, 2008
Give it to the Raptors
The Atlanta Hawks pulled out an OT victory over the Toronto Raptors earlier this week. Mike Bibby hit a 3 to tie it with 0.5 seconds. Then, the Raptors appeared to win it at the end of regulation on an alley-oop to PG TJ Ford. Ford layed it in as the buzzer sounded ... or, as it turned out, right after the buzzer sounded. So, the game went to OT and the Hawks prevailed.
What's the problem? Why should Toronto be awarded the victory? The clock, which was supposed to start when TJ Ford touched the ball, started a couple tenths of a second early. What's the big deal? What's a couple of tenths of a second? Well, Ford released the ball right after (probably less than 0.1 s) the clock hit 0.0. So, had the clock started at the right time, Ford would have got the shot off. Am I 100% sure? No. But, I'm almost certain.
Did I mention that the game was in Atlanta? The Hawks were already forced to replay the end of a game they had won at home this year. Their victory over the Heat was wiped off the board and they were forced to replay the final portion of the game when it was determined that Shaquille O'neal hadn't fouled out.
I'm not calling for the personnel in Atlanta to lose their jobs. And, I don't think the final 0.5 seconds should be replayed. Rather, TJ Ford's bucket should count and OT should be wiped off the board. The clock expired on the Ford shot. The Ford shot was good. The Ford shot put the Raptors up 2 at the end of regulation. The Raptors won the game. It's that simple if you rule that Ford took less than 0.5 s to get the shot off, which I'm almost certain he did.
The officials should have counted the basket. But, if they aren't sure, it's better to let the game go to OT then to make the wrong decision. However, the league needs to step in and make it right. It shouldn't be a replay situation. Why make the Raptors score in 0.5 s again? This isn't a reverse U.S. v. USSR Olympics situation. You can't keep playing the situation until Toronto doesn't score. The win should just be awarded to Toronto, and David Stern should step up and give them what they deserve.
What's the problem? Why should Toronto be awarded the victory? The clock, which was supposed to start when TJ Ford touched the ball, started a couple tenths of a second early. What's the big deal? What's a couple of tenths of a second? Well, Ford released the ball right after (probably less than 0.1 s) the clock hit 0.0. So, had the clock started at the right time, Ford would have got the shot off. Am I 100% sure? No. But, I'm almost certain.
Did I mention that the game was in Atlanta? The Hawks were already forced to replay the end of a game they had won at home this year. Their victory over the Heat was wiped off the board and they were forced to replay the final portion of the game when it was determined that Shaquille O'neal hadn't fouled out.
I'm not calling for the personnel in Atlanta to lose their jobs. And, I don't think the final 0.5 seconds should be replayed. Rather, TJ Ford's bucket should count and OT should be wiped off the board. The clock expired on the Ford shot. The Ford shot was good. The Ford shot put the Raptors up 2 at the end of regulation. The Raptors won the game. It's that simple if you rule that Ford took less than 0.5 s to get the shot off, which I'm almost certain he did.
The officials should have counted the basket. But, if they aren't sure, it's better to let the game go to OT then to make the wrong decision. However, the league needs to step in and make it right. It shouldn't be a replay situation. Why make the Raptors score in 0.5 s again? This isn't a reverse U.S. v. USSR Olympics situation. You can't keep playing the situation until Toronto doesn't score. The win should just be awarded to Toronto, and David Stern should step up and give them what they deserve.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
