2024 NBA Season and Playoffs

[celticsclay]

Pacers-Knicks going 7 games..but Carlisle is livid saying small market teams needs be given a chance to win ouch!!! He gotta get fined lol

Reminding me of the Bucks and 76ers in 2001. The Bucks feeling the NBA refs worked against them to make sure they wouldn't make the Finals because Philly was the bigger market / draw than them.

The Western conference has Minnesota, OKC and Denver ll in the second round none of whom are exactly "big" markets. In the East Indy beat Phili round 1, so that's weird if the NBA wants "bigger" markets to advanced.

Denver won a title last year. SAS got Wemby in the lottery. If the NBA is rigging stuff in favor of big markets then they are doing an awful job at it.

How do you think Philly played Indiana in the first round? That New York Philly series was pretty memorable

[Phantom255x]

Pat Beverley suspended 4 games. That's it??

[angryguy77]

Pacers-Knicks going 7 games..but Carlisle is livid saying small market teams needs be given a chance to win ouch!!! He gotta get fined lol

Reminding me of the Bucks and 76ers in 2001. The Bucks feeling the NBA refs worked against them to make sure they wouldn't make the Finals because Philly was the bigger market / draw than them.

The Western conference has Minnesota, OKC and Denver ll in the second round none of whom are exactly "big" markets. In the East Indy beat Phili round 1, so that's weird if the NBA wants "bigger" markets to advanced.

Denver won a title last year. SAS got Wemby in the lottery. If the NBA is rigging stuff in favor of big markets then they are doing an awful job at it.

There's levels to how they can influence games. I mean look at those awful calls in game 1, just inexcusable. Tell me how 3 refs mistake a kickball on a play so out in the open.

Do you really think Donaghey was the only one? I sincerely doubt it. Now with gambling legal, the odds of there being dirty refs has got to be higher than ever.

I'd think the league may not outright fix things, but maybe just put a thumb on the scale in ways they try to make it not look so obvious.

[Birdman]

Pat Beverley suspended 4 games. That's it??

Unreal, should be at least 20 & 100K..he could had hurt someone

[Kernewek]

Pacers-Knicks going 7 games..but Carlisle is livid saying small market teams needs be given a chance to win ouch!!! He gotta get fined lol

Reminding me of the Bucks and 76ers in 2001. The Bucks feeling the NBA refs worked against them to make sure they wouldn't make the Finals because Philly was the bigger market / draw than them.

The Western conference has Minnesota, OKC and Denver ll in the second round none of whom are exactly "big" markets. In the East Indy beat Phili round 1, so that's weird if the NBA wants "bigger" markets to advanced.

Denver won a title last year. SAS got Wemby in the lottery. If the NBA is rigging stuff in favor of big markets then they are doing an awful job at it.

There's levels to how they can influence games. I mean look at those awful calls in game 1, just inexcusable. Tell me how 3 refs mistake a kickball on a play so out in the open.

Do you really think Donaghey was the only one? I sincerely doubt it. Now with gambling legal, the odds of there being dirty refs has got to be higher than ever.

I'd think the league may not outright fix things, but maybe just put a thumb on the scale in ways they try to make it not look so obvious.

The burden of proof is on you to prove this, though, because with the legalisation & widespread acceptance of gambling comes an incredibly high level of scrutiny. If they were actually 'putting a thumb on the scale' in any way you could definitively prove - that is to say, beyond the refereeing being somewhat variable game-to-game in a series - the referees involved (not to mention the league itself) would instantly be in absolutely massive hot water.

From a 'health of the league' perspective, there is more money to be had than ever before. As a result, two things are true: the gains from illicit behaviour have never been smaller, and the risks have never been higher - because all of that money would vanish overnight if the league was ever found making any sort of organised 'thumb movements' like you're describing.

Now, would the NBA front office prefer to have Lakers/Celtics, Warriors/Knicks, etc etc every year in the Finals? Sure. So would Wyc. So would the Buss Family. So would Dolan & Lacob. But you seem to be unaware of the sheer scope of difficulty in what you're suggesting.

[keevsnick]

Pacers-Knicks going 7 games..but Carlisle is livid saying small market teams needs be given a chance to win ouch!!! He gotta get fined lol

Reminding me of the Bucks and 76ers in 2001. The Bucks feeling the NBA refs worked against them to make sure they wouldn't make the Finals because Philly was the bigger market / draw than them.

The Western conference has Minnesota, OKC and Denver ll in the second round none of whom are exactly "big" markets. In the East Indy beat Phili round 1, so that's weird if the NBA wants "bigger" markets to advanced.

Denver won a title last year. SAS got Wemby in the lottery. If the NBA is rigging stuff in favor of big markets then they are doing an awful job at it.

How do you think Philly played Indiana in the first round? That New York Philly series was pretty memorable

Ya that's my bad, Ind played Milwaukee so both of those are small markets although i'd think the NAB would rather advance the team with Giannis/Lillard if ratings are the goal.

The idea that the NBA reffing favors large markets is still kind of silly to me. its not something you could keep secret.

[Who]

Pacers-Knicks going 7 games..but Carlisle is livid saying small market teams needs be given a chance to win ouch!!! He gotta get fined lol

Reminding me of the Bucks and 76ers in 2001. The Bucks feeling the NBA refs worked against them to make sure they wouldn't make the Finals because Philly was the bigger market / draw than them.

The Western conference has Minnesota, OKC and Denver ll in the second round none of whom are exactly "big" markets. In the East Indy beat Phili round 1, so that's weird if the NBA wants "bigger" markets to advanced.

Denver won a title last year. SAS got Wemby in the lottery. If the NBA is rigging stuff in favor of big markets then they are doing an awful job at it.

There's levels to how they can influence games. I mean look at those awful calls in game 1, just inexcusable. Tell me how 3 refs mistake a kickball on a play so out in the open.

Do you really think Donaghey was the only one? I sincerely doubt it. Now with gambling legal, the odds of there being dirty refs has got to be higher than ever.

I'd think the league may not outright fix things, but maybe just put a thumb on the scale in ways they try to make it not look so obvious.

The burden of proof is on you to prove this, though, because with the legalisation & widespread acceptance of gambling comes an incredibly high level of scrutiny. If they were actually 'putting a thumb on the scale' in any way you could definitively prove - that is to say, beyond the refereeing being somewhat variable game-to-game in a series - the referees involved (not to mention the league itself) would instantly be in absolutely massive hot water.

From a 'health of the league' perspective, there is more money to be had than ever before. As a result, two things are true: the gains from illicit behaviour have never been smaller, and the risks have never been higher - because all of that money would vanish overnight if the league was ever found making any sort of organised 'thumb movements' like you're describing.

Now, would the NBA front office prefer to have Lakers/Celtics, Warriors/Knicks, etc etc every year in the Finals? Sure. So would Wyc. So would the Buss Family. So would Dolan & Lacob. But you seem to be unaware of the sheer scope of difficulty in what you're suggesting.

We already know they are putting their thumb on the scale. They have created a system to institutionalize it. They give referee notes before games / series of what to look for. What plays to prioritize. Both fouls commited by certain defenders to or to protect certain defenders from certain fouls.

They then have teams lobby the league with videos of calls they feel are unfair to them. These videos are looked at by the league. They then give orders to the referees. I forget whether it is series by series or game by game in the playoffs. I think it is game by game. And referees change how they call the game based on what they are told by league office after being lobbied by teams and whatever the league themselves wants.

The thumb is always on the scale. There is no question about thumb on the scale. That is baked into the system.

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

What happened in Gm 1 of the NY Indy series was way worse than that though. That was not a gentle manipulation of the game. That was blatant in your face altering the result. The referees decided that outcome of that game.

Now whether that is gross incompetence that led to the referees deciding the outcome of that game or intentional action is debatable.

[Kernewek]

I don't disagree, but this is not the same thing as what's being suggested, and conflating the two feels to be a pretty easy thing to avoid.

[Moranis]

The Pacers lost game 1 because they left completely ineffective Haliburton on the floor. Brunson torched him and he didn't even take a single shot in over 9 and a half minutes.  3 turnovers, 0 points on 0 shots, while Brunson goes 6 of 10 from the field and scores 21 points. Each team committed 7 fouls.  Yes the refs missed a call at the end, but they missed calls the other way earlier.  Ricky C got thoroughly outcoached and the Pacers got outhustled. Thst is why they lost game 1 (and frankly game 2 as well).