Donaghy ESPN interview

[BBert]

We all knew this.

Yes we did.

 

[BBert]

Right, and remember Smitty getting hammered in the paint and another non-call, which I believe, consequently led to a fastbreak opportunity and score.

That play, and the look on Smitty's face, will be burned into my mind forever.

 

[Pontius]

the refs weren't the reason we collapsed in the 4Q of game 7

This implies that you believe there was a singular reason. Please explain what that singular reason was.

Or admit to faulting in the logic department with an apology.

 

[ABM]

This implies that you believe there was a singular reason. Please explain what that singular reason was.

Countless clanks off the rim for starters.

 

[alex42083]

My favorite tech of all time was this one:

Luckily it was just the WCF, so the game was no big deal. :shakeshead:

Yep, we were screwed again. Not that what's happening now is enough..

 

[mook]

Really, really interesting analysis by Henry Abbot:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/11340/tim-donaghys-claims-on-trial

Excerpt:

Dick Bavetta and big spreads
"From my earliest involvement with [referee Dick] Bavetta, I learned that he likes to keep games close."

Donaghy asserts there was easy money to be made counting on Bavetta to use his whistle to help a team that is trailing.

For a gambler, this strategy would be dicey in games expected to be close. The time to bust this one out is by betting on underdogs when there's a big point-spread. Donaghy says he felt confident that big underdogs would beat the spread if Bavetta was one of the three referees.

It's not hard to find examples when Donaghy was wrong. Bavetta has refereed plenty of blowouts. In January 2004, for instance, the Kings were seven-point favorites over the Suns, but won by 20. The next month, the Rockets were nine-point favorites over the Hawks, and won by 21. In January 2005, the Suns were favored by eight and won by 18. That same year, the Bulls won a Bavetta game by 40 when they were favored by nine, and the Pistons laid a 25-point beating on the Bobcats when they were favored to win by seven. A few months later, the Pistons, favored by seven, beat the Pacers by 25.

Of course, a few losses does not a bad betting strategy make. When you look at all Bavetta games from the period in question, is Donaghy right? Did Dick Bavetta keep games close during the period when Donaghy was betting? Kevin Arnovitz digs in deep with economist Joe Price, whose massive NBA database has no support for Donaghy's claim.

Steve Javie vs. Allen Iverson
Donaghy claims referee Steve Javie does not like NBA star Allen Iverson, and that betting against Iverson's teams in Javie-refereed games was good strategy.

"If Javie was on the court when Iverson was playing," writes Donaghy, "I would usually bet on the other team to win or at least cover the spread. No matter how many times Iverson hit the floor, he rarely saw the foul line."

One can dig into each and every game -- Javie refereed Iverson just 14 times while Donaghy was betting. And you know what? Iverson's teams did just about average, compared to the betting line. On November 26, 2003, when the Pistons were in Philadelphia, the Sixers were favored by one point, but won by four. So, Donaghy's rule would have lost you money that night. Javie was on the court when Iverson's Sixers played in Seattle on December 28, 2004. The Sonics were eight point favorites, but won by just seven. If he had followed his own advice, Donaghy would have lost money that night. Javie refereed when Iverson's Sixers killed the Nets, 116-96, on April 12, 2006.

All together, in the period in question, Iverson's teams beat the spread six times, and failed to beat it seven times when Javie was refereeing. Once, there was a "push" (in 2005, when the Spurs were nine point favorites, and beat the Sixers 100-91).

Win or lose, gamblers typically pay a 10 percent vig. Basically, to win $100, you have to bet $110. If someone had bet $110 on Iverson's opponents to beat the spread in each of the 14 Javie games, they would have won $700, lost $660, (and had no money change hands on the "push" game). Do the math there, and you'll see that this betting strategy would have left you with a measly $40 profit, on $1540 gambled.

You'd have to bet a ton of money to get rich that way. Of course, it's possible that Donaghy only bet some of these games, and happened on a winning streak. But the rule he describes in his book is no way to beat your bookie. And it's not true that following this rule would make you a long-term winner.

Most importantly for those who like to believe that the NBA is a pretty fair game, there's no evidence to support the notion that Allen Iverson had it particularly bad in Javie games. The specifics of which referee made which call are not available -- only the NBA has that -- but the idea that Iverson would shoot fewer free throws in games Javie referees is simply not true. Iverson averaged 8.5 free throws per 36 minutes played in those 14 Javie games, compared to 7.9 per 36 minutes played over his entire career. You can assess this for yourself by going through boxscores for the 14 games Javie reffed while Donaghy says he was betting (11/26/2003 Pistons at Sixers , 2/3/2004 Raptors at Sixers , 12/28/2004 Sixers at SuperSonics , 1/12/2005 Sixers at Bulls , 2/4/2005 Hawks at Sixers, 3/2/2005 Nets at Sixers, 4/1/2005 Mavericks at Sixers, 12/3/2005 Sixers at Spurs, 12/14/2005 Hawks at Sixers, 1/16/2006 Sixers at Wizards, 3/31/2006 Sixers at Knicks, 4/12/2006 Sixers at Nets, 3/30/2007 Nuggets at Suns, 4/16/2007 Timberwolves at Nuggets.)

Wayne Winston is a professor at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, the author of the book "Mathletics" which explains intricate methods of using math to assess sports, including referee bias. In the nine years he worked for the Dallas Mavericks, Winston built a sophisticated database of NBA game information. Winston used his own methods to check into Donaghy's claim about Javie and Iverson. He looked into how Iverson's Sixers teams performed compared to expectations when Javie refereed, and similarly found nothing to confirm Donaghy's assertion. "I computed forecasts based on Sagarin ratings for each game Javie officiated against the 76ers from 2002-2006," he reports, "and found zero evidence that Javie unfavorably impacted 76ers performance in those games."

 

[STOMP]

the refs weren't the reason we collapsed in the 4Q of game 7

Sabas entered that 4th with 3 fouls. He picked up his 4th 5th and 6th fouls in under 3 minutes. One of them was legit, the other two were for getting his face in the way of Shaq's elbows

STOMP

 

[Paxil]

Interseting mook... but the FBI investigator did confirm we was winning his bets. How was it happening?

 

[STOMP]

How many championships were handed - arranged? - to the Lakers?

It could be argued that Sacramento was screwed as well.

I've run into several Nuggets fans who have a big time beef with last season. Can't say I watched that series though as I now avoid Laker games (outside of Blazer matchups) like they are Canzano links... I'm not supporting BS

STOMP

 

[BBert]

Cow Town should be pissed. Game 6 was the worst officiated game in NBA history.

Or the best, depending on where your bread is buttered.

Enjoy those two rings, L*ker fans. They're about as real as the tits on the L*ker girls

I've thought ever since that out of the 'three peat' the Lakers only earned the one in the middle.

 

[DaRizzle]

God I wish we knew the truth...and knew it was the truth

This is saddening if its all/mostly true


(proceed to rag on my Lakers fandom as if this has something to do with me)

 

[Crimson the Cat]

God I wish we knew the truth...and knew it was the truth

This is saddening if its all/mostly true


(proceed to rag on my Lakers fandom as if this has something to do with me)

DaRizzle - Man, I honestly feel bad for Lakers' fans as well. This sort of shitty cloud being blown in over your franchise isn't cool either. I would actually feel better if I knew Portland legitimately lost games because they weren't skilled enough. If roles were reversed - that's a sickening thought, sorry - I'd want to know that my team won games because they were more talented.

It's appeared for years now that this wasn't the case. Now, I'm squarely believing that it isn't.

The whole thing is just one big fat clusterfuck.

 

[DaRizzle]

Those Lakers teams were damn good and the 2001 team might be in the top 5 of all time teams. He did say the games were not fixed it was just that he could use other refs biasis. Biases dont make Brian Shaw go on fire in the 4th quarter. I remember one of you guys talking about a ticky tac foul on Sabonis early in the 4th of that WCF...maybe it was a good call, maybe (probably) not....but do you really think the refs would single somebody like Sabonis out?!? Correct me if Im wrong but wasnt Sabonis relatively low key and respectful?

 

[maxiep]

God I wish we knew the truth...and knew it was the truth

[video=youtube;-yB7J7DYi6M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yB7J7DYi6M[/video]

It had to be said.

 

[Crimson the Cat]

Those Lakers teams were damn good and the 2001 team might be in the top 5 of all time teams. He did say the games were not fixed it was just that he could use other refs biasis. Biases dont make Brian Shaw go on fire in the 4th quarter. I remember one of you guys talking about a ticky tac foul on Sabonis early in the 4th of that WCF...maybe it was a good call, maybe (probably) not....but do you really think the refs would single somebody like Sabonis out?!? Correct me if Im wrong but wasnt Sabonis relatively low key and respectful?

You're right. That team was very good. The Blazers were equally as good in my eyes. Or, for the sake of argument, they were nearly as good as the Lakers. I think we both could agree on this, right?

So, if Sheed was targeted by the collection of refs throughout the season, how many points did that cost them. We wouldn't be able to count just made free throws for the known impact, but also need to factor in the loss of possessions and the loss of a superior player being sent to the bench in foul trouble. How many games did that cost us? Did it cost us home court advantage? Did Sabas, Smith, and, most of all, Pip, have to post more of a toll on their veteran bodies, and did that diminish their impact on the court later in the season, and into the Playoffs.

It's not just about the series. It's about the season. It doesn't feel like we've been operating on an even playing field.

 

[maxiep]

Those Lakers teams were damn good and the 2001 team might be in the top 5 of all time teams. He did say the games were not fixed it was just that he could use other refs biasis. Biases dont make Brian Shaw go on fire in the 4th quarter. I remember one of you guys talking about a ticky tac foul on Sabonis early in the 4th of that WCF...maybe it was a good call, maybe (probably) not....but do you really think the refs would single somebody like Sabonis out?!? Correct me if Im wrong but wasnt Sabonis relatively low key and respectful?

The refs had an issue with the Jail Blazers as a whole. Sabonis was a good guy, so were Pip and Smitty, but Bonzi and Sheed were asshats. That stuff carried over, especially when trying to guard Shaq. Shaq got the benefit of most of the calls, and that's undeniable.

 

[DaRizzle]

The refs had an issue with the Jail Blazers as a whole. Sabonis was a good guy, so were Pip and Smitty, but Bonzi and Sheed were asshats. That stuff carried over, especially when trying to guard Shaq. Shaq got the benefit of most of the calls, and that's undeniable.

Ok...great defenders get the benefit of the calls in a defensive situation...agreed

What I also know is of the all the hacks against Shaq when he was under the basket I would say 70% at best were called. Shaq might suck at FT's but and one's are all gravy

 

[maxiep]

Ok...great defenders get the benefit of the calls in a defensive situation...agreed

What I also know is of the all the hacks against Shaq when he was under the basket I would say 70% at best were called. Shaq might suck at FT's but and one's are all gravy

The defensive theory of verticality was destroyed with the arrival of Shaquille O'Neal. I've never seen a player given more leeway to displace the defender than Shaq.

 

[Paxil]

DaRizzle... he did not say the games were not fixed... he said he did not fix games. I'm not a lawyer... but I believe I read somewhere that his jail time would have been much longer if he did admit to that or if they could have proved that. He did say in other quotes how the NBA made it known to the refs what was in the best interest of the league... and somehow in those cases what was best for the league happened.

 

[DaRizzle]

DaRizzle... he did not say the games were not fixed... he said he did not fix games.

Who are you, Glenn Beck? lol ..."im just asking questions" (just kidding) He said he didnt fix games nor did he know of any ref that did....He would have named names if he could have.

I'm not a lawyer... but I believe I read somewhere that his jail time would have been much longer if he did admit to that or if they could have proved that. He did say in other quotes how the NBA made it known to the refs what was in the best interest of the league... and somehow in those cases what was best for the league happened.

I doubt it...the investigators wanted info...they were already planning on reducing his sentance....Im yet to hear an investigator say that Tim was dishonest in interviews with them.

 

[Paxil]

He was called to task on his distinction about how calling Ts on certain players was not manipulating games. In his mind... a ref can make just about any call... so he can't be wrong for making valid calls. That may be a defense mechanism for his ego... or it may be for fear of legal issues... but I think clearly if you are favoring one team or certain players... as he said specifically he did and other refs did... that yes... in fact... they were manipulating games.

If I was Glen Beck I'd jump off a bridge right now. =)

 

[maxiep]

As a corollary to my discussion of Shaq being allowed to plow defenders, people have been allowed to absolutely clobber him in return. Part of my frustration with the way GO was officiated was that people were allowed to hammer him, but he didn't get the same break when he played defense.

 

[BenDavis503]

I thought it was interesting he said he hasn't watched a game in two years. I understand his time in the joint, but he doesn't care about hoops now?

Why would he lol I wouldn't

My favorite tech of all time was this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in-W5OuCmS4

Luckily it was just the WCF, so the game was no big deal. :shakeshead:

LOL so funny. But I think that is justified. He was looking at the ref and trying to intimidate him. That is not okay. This is a basketball court, not the hood. Sheed doesn't need to be acting like a thug.

maybe (probably) not....but do you really think the refs would single somebody like Sabonis out?!? Correct me if Im wrong but wasnt Sabonis relatively low key and respectful?

It's not singling out Sabonis, it was about the Lakers beating the Blazers. Same thing with the Steelers and Seahawks a couple years back in the Super Bowl. No one wants to see a small market team win. They want to see the big market teams.

Big market = more people watching = more ratings = more PROFIT.

--------------------------------------

90% of any question that ANYONE has in life, can be answered by money. IMO

 

[DaRizzle]

It's not singling out Sabonis, it was about the Lakers beating the Blazers.

Maybe there were some biases in that WCF game 7...I dont know one way or another. What is reasonable to say is that no reffing team is gonna allow a team to go down by 17 in the 4th quarter if they are fixing the game to put the Lakers in the finals. They also had to bank on Shaw going on fire....You guys ALSO had to go on an epic cold streak. Im not trying to rub salt in wounds, just prove a point.

It doesnt make ANY sense to say the refs were fixing that particular game in the Lakers favor considering how it played out. Soooo many things had to align perfectly in that 4th qtr for the lakers to win that game.

 

[MARIS61]

the refs weren't the reason we collapsed in the 4Q of game 7

We didn't collapse at all, the refs stole the game with bogus calls and non-calls.

Like a judge continually over-ruling an attorney to influence the outcome without valid reason.

Except there is no Appellate Court in the NBA.

 

[DaRizzle]

We didn't collapse at all, the refs stole the game with bogus calls and non-calls.

lol...i dont think you are writing that with a straight face

 

[STOMP]

I remember one of you guys talking about a ticky tac foul on Sabonis early in the 4th of that WCF...maybe it was a good call, maybe (probably) not....but do you really think the refs would single somebody like Sabonis out?!? Correct me if Im wrong but wasnt Sabonis relatively low key and respectful?

I already mentioned it again in this thread. Shaq had been limited by foul trouble and entered the 4th with 4 fouls. Sabas entered the 4th with 3 fouls and proceeded to foul out in less then 3 minutes. One of the 3 fouls on AS was legit, the other two were drawn by Oneal smashing elbows into his face and neck. Sabas wasn't exactly greased lighting in general and on those two he was planted waiting on Shaq to start his move. Shaq finished the game with 4 fouls

Sabas's demeanor had nothing to do with it, he played for the wrong team

STOMP

 

[STOMP]

lol...i dont think you are writing that with a straight face

you sure shouldn't be... pretty much anyone besides Laker fan thinks those titles are a joke

STOMP

 

[DaRizzle]

I already mentioned it again in this thread. Shaq had been limited by foul trouble and entered the 4th with 4 fouls. Sabas entered the 4th with 3 fouls and proceeded to foul out in less then 3 minutes. One of the 3 fouls on AS was legit, the other two were drawn by Oneal smashing elbows into his face and neck. Sabas wasn't exactly greased lighting in general and on those two he was planted waiting on Shaq to start his move. Shaq finished the game with 4 fouls

Sabas's demeanor had nothing to do with it, he played for the wrong team

STOMP

and that was the reason everybody on POR went ice cold and the Lakers Shaw went on fire.

Even if those 2 fouls were BS thats not enough to change the outcome...POR biggest lead was like 4 min into the 4th....If my timeline is correct the POR extended the lead after AS was out of the game.

 

[DaRizzle]

you sure shouldn't be... pretty much anyone besides Laker fan thinks those titles are a joke

STOMP

You are probably correct....and of those people who care enough to say that how many do you think were already laker haters and as soon as ANYBODY would say something to taint the lakers they would jump on that bandwagon.

No reffing team is gonna allow a 17 point lead in the 4th quarter to the team the are "manipulating" to lose

How can you argue against that?!?