Around the NBA Playoffs - Round Two

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Rastapopoulos said:
Wow - sensitive much?
Perhaps you could ask this: if the current team had played that Clippers team this year instead of the Pelicans, would we all be baying for somebody's blood?
Click to expand...
Are you saying the 2018 Blazers would be playing the 2016 Clippers? If they got swept by that Clippers team this year, yes I'd be pissed. Depending on which team had homecourt I'd expect the series to go in that team's favor but still disappointed if the Blazers lost even to a healthy Clippers team.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Who denied either of those things? Who even brought up the winning streak?
Click to expand...

I brought it up and I never said anyone denied it, Question back to you would be why do you think I was being "sensitive"?
 
I think the Blazers has a chance to beat that Clippers team even before CP3 and Blake’s injuries. No doubt that really helped though.

If the position was flipped and CJ / Dame got hurt we as fans would probably say wel they only beat us because of the injuries. Who knows how wrong or right it is, but even this year I’ve seen people say that the struggles were because we were missing Moe and Ed was hurt. Think it’s easy to say CP3 and Blake were more important than Moe and Ed to the clippers success.

I actually thought the Blazers has figured out the Clippers a bit and would’ve had a shot to win that series regardless.
 
CupWizier said:
I brought it up and I never said anyone denied it, Question back to you would be why do you think I was being "sensitive"?
Click to expand...
Because I simply asked a question and you took it as an implied criticism (of the Blazers).
 
CupWizier said:
It's just like how some like to claim that the 13 game winning streak was a fluke as well as we were the only team that played other teams that had injured players. I guess all the other teams that had a winning streak shouldn't count theirs either.
Click to expand...
I agree Cup, just like any sport amateur or pro athletic game, injuries are part of the game, and all teams get breaks from time to time.
 
Orion Bailey said:
This was probably already answered but this is an easy one.

Because this isnt an individual sports. Its a real sport.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is that easy.

The truly great players can at least lead their team to the playoffs. Are you saying Dame's team in 2015-16 is better than any AD team prior to this year? This is the first year I think anyone can say that AD put a team on his back and carried them to the playoffs. Dame did the same thing too this year.

I don't get how with all this talk about how crappy and flawed our roster is that anyone could then say that Dame just has the benefit of it being a team sport. Once again I'm not arguing that Dame is a better player than AD but AD's greatness hasn't translated to much consistent team success so far.
 
dviss1 said:
All of you who liked this post have no clue.
Click to expand...
I played basketball at various levels for 20 years and I’ve always thought it’s the worst part of the sport. The offensive player initiated contact most of the time and it’s called a defensive foul. If the centers arms come down at all its a foul. So you have 190-210lbs run into your chest and if your arms come down it’s a foul on you lol.

The NBA rules are set up totally in favor of the offense.
Dames gotten really good at this too if a defenders arms are low the offensive player swings through the arm or arms of the defender and the foul is on the defender for not moving.

Quite literally the defender is expected to move out of the way of the offensive player who is trying to create contact. No wonder you can’t guard some of these guys because it’s basically against the rules.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
I played basketball at various levels for 20 years and I’ve always thought it’s the worst part of the sport. The offensive player initiated contact most of the time and it’s called a defensive foul. If the centers arms come down at all its a foul. So you have 190-210lbs run into your chest and if your arms come down it’s a foul on you lol.

The NBA rules are set up totally in favor of the offense.
Dames gotten really good at this too if a defenders arms are low the offensive player swings through the arm or arms of the defender and the foul is on the defender for not moving.

Quite literally the defender is expected to move out of the way of the offensive player who is trying to create contact. No wonder you can’t guard some of these guys because it’s basically against the rules.
Click to expand...

So, until you referee a game you won't fully understand why you must first be a legal defender.

And you're completely wrong about the bolded parts. Doesn't sound like you understand the principle of vertically.
 
Last edited:
dviss1 said:
So, until you referee a game you won't fully understand why you must first be a legal defender.

And you're completely wrong about the bolded part.
Click to expand...

I understand what a legal defender is and I’m not wrong. Your job as a defender if you can’t keep your entire body in front of the offensive player is to move or it’s a foul on you. Even if the offensive player is initiating all of the contact. How many times per game does Harden or Lebron or even Dame run into a defenders leg and it’s a foul on the defender because they didn’t move their leg out of the way. I don’t know how anyone can watch an NBA game and not see that the rules are more and more set up to make playing defense much harder than playing offense.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
I understand what a legal defender is and I’m not wrong. Your job as a defender if you can’t keep your entire body in front of the offensive player is to move or it’s a foul on you. Even if the offensive player is initiating all of the contact. How many times per game does Harden or Lebron or even Dame run into a defenders leg and it’s a foul on the defender because they didn’t move their leg out of the way. I don’t know how anyone can watch an NBA game and not see that the rules are more and more set up to make playing defense much harder than playing offense.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to argue with you. You're clearly not understanding legal guarding position. Also the creation of contract should NEVER be the prerequisite for a foul call. That's just asinine.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
I understand what a legal defender is and I’m not wrong. Your job as a defender if you can’t keep your entire body in front of the offensive player is to move or it’s a foul on you. Even if the offensive player is initiating all of the contact. How many times per game does Harden or Lebron or even Dame run into a defenders leg and it’s a foul on the defender because they didn’t move their leg out of the way. I don’t know how anyone can watch an NBA game and not see that the rules are more and more set up to make playing defense much harder than playing offense.
Click to expand...

Secondly, STOP watching the NBA looking for good officiating. That's your problem.
 
dviss1 said:
Secondly, STOP watching the NBA looking for good officiating. That's your problem.
Click to expand...
I understand legal guarding position, I just don't like it at least the way nba calls it. I mean the discussion here is about the NBA so my problem is in essence the NBA refs and how they call stuff. I think the offensive player gets away with way more than they should. While defenders are at a major disadvantage.
I haven't reffed a game sure but I've played enough to know that a good portion of the time refs called fouls on the guys defending me if I'm honest they should've been no calls or fouls on me.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
I understand legal guarding position, I just don't like it at least the way nba calls it. I mean the discussion here is about the NBA so my problem is in essence the NBA refs and how they call stuff. I think the offensive player gets away with way more than they should. While defenders are at a major disadvantage.
I haven't reffed a game sure but I've played enough to know that a good portion of the time refs called fouls on the guys defending me if I'm honest they should've been no calls or fouls on me.
Click to expand...

People who complain about officiating should go ref some games.

Honestly.

It's like telling a doctor how to use his scalpel after watching ER....
 
dviss1 said:
People who complain about officiating should go ref some games.

Honestly.

It's like telling a doctor how to use his scalpel after watching ER....
Click to expand...

Next time you want to complain about a politician, well just think to yourself until you've been a politician you can't tell them how to do it.
This line of reasoning is just ridiculous. I couldn't be a doctor but if they're cutting the wrong leg I don't have to be a doctor to tell them they're doing a bad job.
You don't have to be a referee to see that they make bad calls.
This is just nonsense... I get it the referee paternity has to protect themselves, by saying well if you haven't done it you can't tell us how to do it. Just like the Players like to tell us well if you haven't been in the NBA you can't tell them anything.
No one is saying being a referee is an easy Job, but lots of people have hard jobs that get critiqued by people who haven't done their job. It's life.
Such a weak cop out to stick your fingers in your ears and "go nanananana, I can't hear you until you've been a ref too".
 
dviss1 said:
People who complain about officiating should go ref some games.

Honestly.

It's like telling a doctor how to use his scalpel after watching ER....
Click to expand...
I think he's expressing what he wishes the rule was, not what the rule is. It seems like his point is, the refs call it by the rule, he doesn't like the rule, he wishes the rule were changed. In his opinion.

If I've got that wrong, don't whistle me for the tech!

Have a great Monday!

:cheers:
 
dviss1 said:
I'm not going to argue with you. You're clearly not understanding legal guarding position. Also the creation of contract should NEVER be the prerequisite for a foul call. That's just asinine.
Click to expand...

Unless it's one or more of Turner / Crabbe / Leonard, then I cry foul.
 
BBert said:
I think he's expressing what he wishes the rule was, not what the rule is. It seems like his point is, the refs call it by the rule, he doesn't like the rule, he wishes the rule were changed. In his opinion.

If I've got that wrong, don't whistle me for the tech!

Have a great Monday!

:cheers:
Click to expand...
This is basically it.
I don't like the rules. I get that bad calls will be made, and I'm not even saying the refs do anything other than their job. We all have moments of doing well, and not so well at what we get paid for. I think the rules are bad though.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
Next time you want to complain about a politician, well just think to yourself until you've been a politician you can't tell them how to do it.
This line of reasoning is just ridiculous. I couldn't be a doctor but if they're cutting the wrong leg I don't have to be a doctor to tell them they're doing a bad job.
You don't have to be a referee to see that they make bad calls.
This is just nonsense... I get it the referee paternity has to protect themselves, by saying well if you haven't done it you can't tell us how to do it. Just like the Players like to tell us well if you haven't been in the NBA you can't tell them anything.
No one is saying being a referee is an easy Job, but lots of people have hard jobs that get critiqued by people who haven't done their job. It's life.
Such a weak cop out to stick your fingers in your ears and "go nanananana, I can't hear you until you've been a ref too".
Click to expand...

Trump is a politician. Kindly STFU now....
 
BBert said:
I think he's expressing what he wishes the rule was, not what the rule is. It seems like his point is, the refs call it by the rule, he doesn't like the rule, he wishes the rule were changed. In his opinion.

If I've got that wrong, don't whistle me for the tech!

Have a great Monday!

:cheers:
Click to expand...

I know this. He'd hate it if it were called in a way where a defender doesn't have to be in front of a dribbler?

Careful what you wish for.

That sounds silly...
 
dviss1 said:
I know this. He'd hate it if it were called in a way where a defender doesn't have to be in front of a dribbler?

Careful what you wish for.

That sounds silly...
Click to expand...
I think what he's asking would require giving the officials a lot more discretion, to determine who initiated the contact. I'm not sure I want NBA Refs to have MORE discretion to pick winners and losers, LOL. What the rules "should" be is a reasonable debate though.
 
dviss1 said:
I know this. He'd hate it if it were called in a way where a defender doesn't have to be in front of a dribbler?

Careful what you wish for.

That sounds silly...
Click to expand...
That’s not at all my point. You keep telling yourself that though, if that’s what makes you feel superior. My main point is that Defenders are at a huge disadvantage by rule, compared to the offensive player.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
Next time you want to complain about a politician, well just think to yourself until you've been a politician you can't tell them how to do it.
This line of reasoning is just ridiculous. I couldn't be a doctor but if they're cutting the wrong leg I don't have to be a doctor to tell them they're doing a bad job.
You don't have to be a referee to see that they make bad calls.
This is just nonsense... I get it the referee paternity has to protect themselves, by saying well if you haven't done it you can't tell us how to do it. Just like the Players like to tell us well if you haven't been in the NBA you can't tell them anything.
No one is saying being a referee is an easy Job, but lots of people have hard jobs that get critiqued by people who haven't done their job. It's life.
Such a weak cop out to stick your fingers in your ears and "go nanananana, I can't hear you until you've been a ref too".
Click to expand...

Couple things:

I've said this before:

I don't know how to fly a helicopter but if I see one in a tree, I can say "dude fucked up"!

But refereeing is a bit different.

There's absolutely no way you can see what he's seeing from your spot on the bench. If that's the case, there would be no reason to run after the players.

No one, from the players to the coaches to the spectators, knows the rules. There are people all the time yelling for "over the back" when there's literally no such rule.

The bottom line is this:

The definition of a legal guarding defender will not and most certainly should not be changed.

100% of the forum members would hate that change.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
By your logic, until you go become a Politician for a while you shouldn't complain about Trump either. Or does your logic only work, when it's in your favor...
Click to expand...

Wrong. Trump ran for president back in 2000 as the Reform Party candidate. Also, in 2007-9 I was a Precinct committee person.

Know WTF you're talking about, then post.
 
dviss1 said:
Wrong. Trump ran for president back in 2000 as the Reform Party candidate. Also, in 2007-9 I was a Precinct committee person.

Know WTF you're talking about, then post.
Click to expand...
You crack me up. I’m no Trump supporter and yes and I’ve never been in politics but yes I can still criticize him. That was the point.

You said in essence no one can criticize a Ref unless they go do it. My point is that’s obviously not true.
My assertion stands that the nba rules for offensive players put the defenders in a much weaker position, and some of the fouls that guys like Harden, Lebron, even Dame get are kind of ridiculous.
Some examples Dame runs around a moving screen, opposing guard touches Dame, so Dame throws the ball up towards the basket and gets 3 FT's you see guys do this all the time, with contact that didn't effect the shot at all.
You also see a defender moving their feet and has good position, the offensive player continues to run into and through them and the defender gets called for a foul because he didn't move.

How about Dante Exum fouling Harden with his face, because Harden decided to bring the ball and his body back into Exum during a drive. That stuff is ridiculous, the Defender basically has to do "everything" perfectly right while the offensive player flails their arms, and throws their body into them.

You can talk about now knowing the rules, all you want but I never said anything about over the back, and while I haven't studied the rule book, I have a pretty good idea on what the rules are. You haven't said anything to make me believe I'm wrong, the offensive player has the advantage by rule over the defender.
Does the offensive player have to have be in a "legal" offensive anything...? It seems like all the rules are tilted towards the offensive player. Can't tell you how many times I've seen an offensive player run straight into the chest of a defender and the defender buckled in mid air so his arms naturally moved and because of that it was a foul on him....
 
dviss1 said:
Couple things:

I've said this before:

I don't know how to fly a helicopter but if I see one in a tree, I can say "dude fucked up"!

But refereeing is a bit different.

There's absolutely no way you can see what he's seeing from your spot on the bench. If that's the case, there would be no reason to run after the players.

No one, from the players to the coaches to the spectators, knows the rules. There are people all the time yelling for "over the back" when there's literally no such rule.

The bottom line is this:

The definition of a legal guarding defender will not and most certainly should not be changed.

100% of the forum members would hate that change.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a funny story but about baseball. This guy was sitting in the stands and all game long was complaining about the balls and strike calls until finally between innings the umpire walks behind the backstop and sits down next to the guy and the guy asks "what are you doing, you're suppose to umpire". The ump replied that the loudmouth seemed to think he had a better view of the strike zone so he thought he would come up into the stands and call it from the same place. The guy shut up the rest of the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top