NBA / NCAA Basketball

Page 23 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
Cavs vs. Warriors...I just hope we see 4-7 games of good BB, not 7 lopsided games.
Stephen A Smith says the Cavs will win one game at the most. So it definitely won't be a five game series...............
SAS is an idiot. I have just above zero respect for him as a sports talking head. Yelling words from the thesaurus does not a smart dude make.
He said to "expect a repeat of next year". He might have said juggernaut three times. He said the Cavs couldn't overcome BOS three point shooting. Uhmm, but they did.
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
Cavs vs. Warriors...I just hope we see 4-7 games of good BB, not 7 lopsided games.
Stephen A Smith says the Cavs will win one game at the most. So it definitely won't be a five game series...............
SAS is an idiot. I have just above zero respect for him as a sports talking head. Yelling words from the thesaurus does not a smart dude make.
He said to "expect a repeat of next year". He might have said juggernaut three times. He said the Cavs couldn't overcome BOS three point shooting. Uhmm, but they did.
He picked the 76ers to win the East before the playoffs started then changed his mind at least three times since.
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
Cavs vs. Warriors...I just hope we see 4-7 games of good BB, not 7 lopsided games.
Stephen A Smith says the Cavs will win one game at the most. So it definitely won't be a five game series...............
SAS is an idiot. I have just above zero respect for him as a sports talking head. Yelling words from the thesaurus does not a smart dude make.
He said to "expect a repeat of next year". He might have said juggernaut three times. He said the Cavs couldn't overcome BOS three point shooting. Uhmm, but they did.
He picked the 76ers to win the East before the playoffs started then changed his mind at least three times since.
:lol:
 
I'm not paying much attention, but why do you guys suppose popularity in the NBA is up? We're seeing the same two teams in the finals for the 4th year in a row. Before that it was the same team two years in a row, and in fact every LeBron James team has made the finals for 8 years in a row. And in the last 12 years, only 9 different teams have made the finals. That's an extremely predictable, non-competitive league (at least when it comes to champions). The NBA season is also very long, stretching almost eight months, which means fans are sitting through an awful lot of games, over 100 often, before the (almost inevitable) champion is revealed.

I know other leagues with similar issues can be mentioned. I'm not looking for a comparison. That's not my question. I'm curious why, given the reasons I listed above, popularity in the league is up.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
I'm not paying much attention, but why do you guys suppose popularity in the NBA is up? We're seeing the same two teams in the finals for the 4th year in a row. Before that it was the same team two years in a row, and in fact every LeBron James team has made the finals for 8 years in a row. And in the last 12 years, only 9 different teams have made the finals. That's an extremely predictable, non-competitive league (at least when it comes to champions). The NBA season is also very long, stretching almost eight months, which means fans are sitting through an awful lot of games, over 100 often, before the (almost inevitable) champion is revealed.

I know other leagues with similar issues can be mentioned. I'm not looking for a comparison. That's not my question. I'm curious why, given the reasons I listed above, popularity in the league is up.
I don't really know..........most people thought months again that Golden State would win again and that the Cavs would be the probable opponents and now most people are saying that it won't go six games. In You Tube the NBA seems to be very popular more so than the NFL No one really thinks the Cavs have a serious shot at the title and with Lebron becoming a free agent, the frenzy will continue about where he lands next season. Not many think he will stay at the Cavs.
 
You have one major market with a team that is rejuvenated after it's lengthy and controversial "process" (Philadelphia). They are an exciting team with elite young talent. Then you have the Celtics, one of the league's historically great franchises, building on their success from the previous season, this in spite of losing their best player (Kyrie Irving) prior to the start of the playoffs and their second most important acquisition (Gordon Hayward) in the very first game of the season. There are probably long time Celtic fans all over the country who are salivating over the prospects of this team. Both of these teams proved in the playoffs that the east is no longer a done deal for LeBron and the Cavaliers.

In the west you had Houston, with the addition of Chris Paul, playing a brand of basketball that harkens back to the days of the ABA, with their coach Mike D'Antoni, putting no limits on how free his players could be on the court, setting records for 3 point attempts and ultimately ending the season with the best record in the league. Add to that they showed (in the regular season) that they could out Warrior the Warriors in terms of free-wheeling offenses coupled with a team capable of playing shut down defense. Competition is good!

Add Oklahoma's addition of Paul George and Carmelo Anthony to Russell Westbrook and his triple double, MVP awarded 2016-2017 season, and they were a saga that drew the attention of fans wondering whether they would mesh and be a threat in the west (NOPE!).

The Lakers added the drama and family baggage of Lonzo Ball to a roster already brimming with potential, giving another major market and historically great franchise an entertaining team and their national fan base hope for the future.

I think all these elements and probably others that I'm forgetting contributed to the increase in popularity of the league.
 
I've found that while the Warriors and LeBron have broad appeal, there is equal amounts of fans out there that just can't stand them and take pleasure in rooting for them to fail. With both the Warriors and Cavs fighting back from being down 3-2 in their conference finals, there was likely hope that they would in fact not make it to the finals. There may be a dip in the ratings/audience after this let down for some fans.
 
Re:

Angliru said:
You have one major market with a team that is rejuvenated after it's lengthy and controversial "process" (Philadelphia). They are an exciting team with elite young talent. Then you have the Celtics, one of the league's historically great franchises, building on their success from the previous season, this in spite of losing their best player (Kyrie Irving) prior to the start of the playoffs and their second most important acquisition (Gordon Hayward) in the very first game of the season. There are probably long time Celtic fans all over the country who are salivating over the prospects of this team. Both of these teams proved in the playoffs that the east is no longer a done deal for LeBron and the Cavaliers.

In the west you had Houston, with the addition of Chris Paul, playing a brand of basketball that harkens back to the days of the ABA, with their coach Mike D'Antoni, putting no limits on how free his players could be on the court, setting records for 3 point attempts and ultimately ending the season with the best record in the league. Add to that they showed (in the regular season) that they could out Warrior the Warriors in terms of free-wheeling offenses coupled with a team capable of playing shut down defense. Competition is good!

Add Oklahoma's addition of Paul George and Carmelo Anthony to Russell Westbrook and his triple double, MVP awarded 2016-2017 season, and they were a saga that drew the attention of fans wondering whether they would mesh and be a threat in the west (NOPE!).

The Lakers added the drama and family baggage of Lonzo Ball to a roster already brimming with potential, giving another major market and historically great franchise an entertaining team and their national fan base hope for the future.

I think all these elements and probably others that I'm forgetting contributed to the increase in popularity of the league.
Yes I think the playoffs even though ending up with the same two teams were much more interesting than the NFL last season. The two young teams were a good match with the 76ers and the Celtics. The Bucks pushed the Celtics to seven games. The Cavs were pushed to seven games in the first round by the Pacers. The Jazz pushed Houston but without Rubio later on which cost them. Every series across both conferences was pretty good or very good with only Toronto V the Cavs being the only blowout series. Jazz v Thunder was another good series. Even though the East has been the weaker conference the emergence of the Celtics and 76ers and possibly even the Bucks, all three teams being young means the East/West power could be about to swing in the next few years. Orlando and the Jazz have also made good improvement in the West.

Needless to say the NBA looks pretty healthy. If Lebron leaves the Cavs, they along with the Spurs in the West will find it much harder obviously. What happens with Lebron and Leonard and where they land will be another factor for playoff teams next season. And the Celtics with Hayward and Kyrie will be much better. If any two playoff teams slip next year along with San Antonio it could be the Cavs and Toronto maybe. Toronto need more than just a new coach. Oklahoma also have to make some decisions.
 
Nah, James isn't close to MJ, definitely a second-tier HOFer, what has he ever done in the playoffs? :)

He's the Froome of the NBA, I'm sure he's on stuff, but the difference is that whatever he's on doesn't make nearly the difference for basketball skills that blood doping can make for cycling. Plays almost every minute of every game for 15 years, never gets injured. Huge respect.
 
Good game 1. James needs more help from his team at both ends of the floor. Cavs got dinged with two bad calls late (EDIT: 3 bad calls as per the NBA office). Smith WTH?! CLE forgot to show up for OT. GS has a lot of ways to score. GS showed up for OT.

The ref made a bad call at the end of OT that led to the scuffle. To add to the fact that it was the wrong call he made a dramatic signal for the ejection. Don't be part of the story line, just walk over to the scorers table and report your call. That being said, Green is a thug and Thompson is a douche so that's what you get. TT, who cares if they take a shot at the end, and who cares if DG is being an asshat, live to play another day.

EDIT: The missed lane violation on Hill's second shot is HUGE. One refs only job is to watch the lane until the ball hits the rim, so WTH?!
 
Re:

jmdirt said:
Good game 1. James needs more help from his team at both ends of the floor. Cavs got dinged with two bad calls late. Smith WTH?! CLE forgot to show up for OT. GS has a lot of ways to score. GS showed up for OT.

The ref made a bad call at the end of OT that led to the scuffle. To add to the fact that it was the wrong call he made a dramatic signal for the ejection. Don't be part of the story line, just walk over to the scorers table and report your call. That being said, Green is a thug and Thompson is a douche so that's what you get. TT, who cares if they take a shot at the end, and who cares if DG is being an asshat, live to play another day.
Cavs blew that one with help from the ref. No wonder Lebron looked frustrated.
 
Bron can't hit for 50 every game. Durant won't have such a mediocre (for him) performance at both ends for the entire series. J.R. Smith is guaranteed to frustrate LeBron throughout this series, although he had a better game than any he played in the Boston series. His offensive rebound near the end of regulation play was clutch, it's just that what followed certainly had Lue and James scratching their heads!

It was an exciting and competitive game but IMO LeBron and Lue's complaints are unfounded. He was still moving into Durant's path when contact was made. That was why the refs reversed the call.
 
A shame the Refs overturned the foul on lebron with one min left when Cleveland were up. I don't care if it was or not, Refs should favour anyone playing this ridiculous golden state team. That durant and steph will claim championships when they fluked themselves into the best team ever assembled like this, while none is close to lebron, is a shame.
 
Re:

Angliru said:
Bron can't hit for 50 every game. Durant won't have such a mediocre (for him) performance at both ends for the entire series. J.R. Smith is guaranteed to frustrate LeBron throughout this series, although he had a better game than any he played in the Boston series. His offensive rebound near the end of regulation play was clutch, it's just that what followed certainly had Lue and James scratching their heads!

It was an exciting and competitive game but IMO LeBron and Lue's complaints are unfounded. He was still moving into Durant's path when contact was made. That was why the refs reversed the call.
Read the rulebook on that. Its not 1980 when you had to be set.
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
Angliru said:
Bron can't hit for 50 every game. Durant won't have such a mediocre (for him) performance at both ends for the entire series. J.R. Smith is guaranteed to frustrate LeBron throughout this series, although he had a better game than any he played in the Boston series. His offensive rebound near the end of regulation play was clutch, it's just that what followed certainly had Lue and James scratching their heads!

It was an exciting and competitive game but IMO LeBron and Lue's complaints are unfounded. He was still moving into Durant's path when contact was made. That was why the refs reversed the call.
Read the rulebook on that. Its not 1980 when you had to be set.
..."still moving into Durant's path"... Obviously after multiple views by game officials they determined that he had not established himself for there to be a charging call. I guess one's opinion of the play can be greatly influenced by who they are rooting for. I'm not going to deny that I am rooting for the Warriors but if it's that easy to draw a charging foul based on how you think the refs should have called that play then the number of players penetrating to the basket would be few and far between. Defenders could easily suddenly slide in front of offensive players and hip check them with no fear of being charged for blocking. Are you saying that the refs purposely ignored the rule book and just decided to make a bad call after spending minutes reviewing the video footage?

Edit: Go to the NBA.com website and see the video where an explanation is given by Joe Borgia who I think is a representative from the NBA replay center.
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
Good game 1. James needs more help from his team at both ends of the floor. Cavs got dinged with two bad calls late. Smith WTH?! CLE forgot to show up for OT. GS has a lot of ways to score. GS showed up for OT.

The ref made a bad call at the end of OT that led to the scuffle. To add to the fact that it was the wrong call he made a dramatic signal for the ejection. Don't be part of the story line, just walk over to the scorers table and report your call. That being said, Green is a thug and Thompson is a douche so that's what you get. TT, who cares if they take a shot at the end, and who cares if DG is being an asshat, live to play another day.
Cavs blew that one with help from the ref. No wonder Lebron looked frustrated.
LeBron played his heart out. The Cavs seemed to lose all of their momentum and motivation once the game went into overtime.
 
Re: Re:

Angliru said:
jmdirt said:
Angliru said:
Bron can't hit for 50 every game. Durant won't have such a mediocre (for him) performance at both ends for the entire series. J.R. Smith is guaranteed to frustrate LeBron throughout this series, although he had a better game than any he played in the Boston series. His offensive rebound near the end of regulation play was clutch, it's just that what followed certainly had Lue and James scratching their heads!

It was an exciting and competitive game but IMO LeBron and Lue's complaints are unfounded. He was still moving into Durant's path when contact was made. That was why the refs reversed the call.
Read the rulebook on that. Its not 1980 when you had to be set.
..."still moving into Durant's path"... Obviously after multiple views by game officials they determined that he had not established himself for there to be a charging call. I guess one's opinion of the play can be greatly influenced by who they are rooting for. I'm not going to deny that I am rooting for the Warriors but if it's that easy to draw a charging foul based on how you think the refs should have called that play then the number of players penetrating to the basket would be few and far between. Defenders could easily suddenly slide in front of offensive players and hip check them with no fear of being charged for blocking. Are you saying that the refs purposely ignored the rule book and just decided to make a bad call after spending minutes reviewing the video footage?

Edit: Go to the NBA.com website and see the video where an explanation is given by Joe Borgia who I think is a representative from the NBA replay center.
I saw his vid plus others from credible sources (retired refs, rules experts, etc. not counting the 100s of talking heads). Joe must defend what happened, but the others just have to tell it like it is. 98/100 times this is a charge in the NBA so I guess they got one of the two. If James wouldn't have braced for the contact it would have looked 'cleaner'. I'm not saying they purposely ignored the rule book, I'm saying that they didn't interpret it correctly. Joe says "Kenny, the rules are very confusing." I'll leave it at that.

As far as being influenced by who I want to win...I'm rooting for seven good games.
 
Re: Re:

Angliru said:
movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
Good game 1. James needs more help from his team at both ends of the floor. Cavs got dinged with two bad calls late. Smith WTH?! CLE forgot to show up for OT. GS has a lot of ways to score. GS showed up for OT.

The ref made a bad call at the end of OT that led to the scuffle. To add to the fact that it was the wrong call he made a dramatic signal for the ejection. Don't be part of the story line, just walk over to the scorers table and report your call. That being said, Green is a thug and Thompson is a douche so that's what you get. TT, who cares if they take a shot at the end, and who cares if DG is being an asshat, live to play another day.
Cavs blew that one with help from the ref. No wonder Lebron looked frustrated.
LeBron played his heart out. The Cavs seemed to lose all of their momentum and motivation once the game went into overtime.
As is often the way, the team that looked like winning just before overtime, loses momentum and start over thinking. I have to admit I thought the call on Lebron could go either way. It looked awkward. Could come back to haunt the Cavs later in the series especially if there are other close games.
 
Let’s do some analysis of that “bad” call. Durant drove to the basket, and ran into James. The initial call was against Durant, for charging; it was reversed to blocking, against James. There are two issues that need to be separated: first, what was the correct call? And second, should the play even have been reviewed?

The correct call appears to have been blocking, because on replay, James was clearly still moving at the time Durant ran into him, and further, James shifted his body in a way that he appeared to initiate contact. So it seems the refs did get the call right.

The real problem was in the review. The rules say that kind of play can’t be reviewed unless there’s a question of whether the defender, James in this case, was in the restricted area. He clearly was not, wasn’t close, so the play should not have been reviewable. Once it was reviewed, and only then, could other factors, such as James’s movement, be taken into account.

There’s a simple legal analogy for this situation. The police illegally enter your home, and while there, find drugs, so they arrest you. The drugs were there, the drugs are illegal, the law says you should be arrested for having them. But if the police had been following the law, none of this could have happened.

There is even a doping analogy. Landis was sanctioned for a positive in the testosterone isotope test. But that test is only supposed to be applied if his T/E ratio was above a certain criterion, and during the CAS hearing it came out that there were enough problems with the lab’s measurement of that that the isotope test never should have been run.

All that said, all this talk about how this call cost the Cavs the game is a little exaggerated. The probability of their winning would have increased quite a bit, but it wasn't a stark win vs. loss change. If the charging call stood, the Cavs would have got the ball with a two point lead and 30+ seconds to play. They could have run the game clock down to about ten seconds, and if they made a field goal, would have had a four (or five) point lead. In that case it would have been very hard for the Warriors to win. But if the Warriors had stopped them, they would have got the ball back with time to shoot a tying or winning basket.

Let’s say the odds of a stop were 50/50, and the odds of a tying basket were 50/50. So the Warriors still had roughly a 25% chance of tying the game, which means the Cavs had a 75% chance of winning in regulation. Also, if the Warriors had tied the game, the Cavs still would have had about a 50% chance of winning in OT, so overall their chances of winning were close to 90%.

That’s pretty certain, right? Yes, but as events actually unfolded, the game did go to OT, which means that Cavs still had a 50% chance of winning. So the call reduced their odds from about 90% to 50%. That’s a very significant decrease, the Cavs certainly have reason to be upset, but it’s not as though the call made it certain they would lose. It turned a near-certain win into a 50/50 proposition. And it was only 50/50 because of the mistakes the Cavs made later in the game; they still could have won, even with that call.

What about those Cavs’s mistakes later in the game? With about five seconds to play, and trailing by one, a Cav player got two free throws. He made the first to tie the game, but missed the second. He missed the second badly, which was actually a break for the Cavs, because it bounced towards one of their own players, J.R. Smith. The miss was the kind of thing players sometimes attempt intentionally when the free throw would still leave the team short, and they need a quick field goal. Smith, though, just dribbled until it was too late for a shot.

Did these cost the Cavs the game? If the second FT had been made, they would have had a one point lead with about five seconds left. That would be enough time for the Warriors to get a shot off, so it would not have been a certain Cavs win by any means. Let’s say their odds would have been about 70%. What if the Cavs had attempted the FG after Smith rebounded? James was wide open in the corner; Smith could have passed to him. By that time, the clock would be down to close to zero, so if James had made that hypothetical shot, the Cavs almost certainly would have won. But a wide open shot from that distance is not a certainty; it’s roughly 50/50.

Which is about what the Cavs faced going into OT anyway! People who claim these plays cost the Cavs the game forget this. The Cavs did not lose in regulation; they went into OT, where they still had about a 50/50 chance of winning. So whatever the odds were of the Cavs winning if the refs had not reversed that call; if the second free throw had not been missed; if Smith had passed to James; those odds have to be compared not to 0%, but to 50%. Once one realizes this, one sees that while these were critical plays, they did not affect the outcome of the game quite as dramatically as many are claiming.
 
Smith obviously didn't know the score and Lebron could have taken the shot instead of passing to Hill. Many are surprised he didn't with the way he was shooting. Hill is an 80% shooter from the line but missed the second shot. Exciting game but like many others have said, the Cavs needed to steal a game on the road and they had a great chance to do that before Iguodola comes back from injury and tightens up the Warriors defense.
 
Wasn't Smith also the idiot who was marking Curry at the end of the 1st half and just let him take a free 3 pointer with 1 second left - which Curry made.

That was another massive mistake. 3 points in a game that ended even, is still 3 points.
 
The Hitch said:
Wasn't Smith also the idiot who was marking Curry at the end of the 1st half and just let him take a free 3 pointer with 1 second left - which Curry made.

That was another massive mistake. 3 points in a game that ended even, is still 3 points.
Yes, Smith was just waiting for the clock to run out and SC drained a long three (well not that long for him).
 
A defender can be moving and still be in a defensive position. Several have referred to James 'not being set'. Being set hasn't been in the rule book for a long time. I say he is bracing for contact, others are saying he is initiating contact. The only one who knows the answer to that is James.

I edited my original post about the game, but I'll also add it here: the official who's only job on a free throw is to watch the lane missed a lane violation on Green on Hill's second shot. Hill should have gotten another shot. Merckx, you have to redo all of your odds/probabilities now! :lol:

Merckx: " What if the Cavs had attempted the FG after Smith rebounded? James was wide open in the corner; Smith could have passed to him. " Actually James was wide open out top, but I agree, Smith should have passed it to him. No matter what is going through your head, if the star of your team is calling for the ball, throw it to him.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY