NBA Season 2021-22

[celticsclay]

I mean in general I would really only like to see players ejected if they wind up and throw a punch or clothesline a guy or shove him into the stands. I get what people are saying about the rules, but I think face contact was completely accidental and I don’t think the jersey part was particularly malicious. In real time it seemed like he tried to hold him up. So I think a flagrant 1 would have been ok.

Intent is irrelevant

That’s actually not how they ref it. There are definitely very subjective elements involved, chiefly the refs making the decisions. Someone else in this thread already mentioned greens history. That is something they have admitted they have considered over the years (greens kick in the finals being the most famous example). We can pretend they don’t judge intent but they pretty obviously consider it.

Where?

If you really want me dig up some articles on this I can probably find them. But maybe I can make this even easier. If Marcus smart is throwing a pass and Bruce brown runs into and Marcus smart hits him very hard in the face following through on the pass. You believe that if smart went up to him after a hard foul and got up and hit him the same speed power and spot as his pass follow through with his he doesn’t get penalized in one situation more than the other? That seems like a pretty hard position to defend.

Those aren't comparable, as a pass follow through would not qualify as excessive contact (or maybe even unnecessary), whereas the latter obviously would.

Ok. But we have all heard the refs say it was a common basketball move when describing as reasoning for it being a common foul rather than a flagrant. It happened in one of the games the last few days in where a guy was dribbling and made questionable contact and the ref said it was a common basketball swing. That’s obviously a judgement call and a matter of intent (I think he stuck his arm out further than his normal running motion or leg further than his natural shooting motion so I am calling it a flagrant. They even debated this in todays game Gouki on the foul they called on grant Williams on the three point attempt. Steve javee said this will be overturned but I don’t think they will call an offensive foul cause his leg was not kicked out so far as to be unnatural motion. That’s judging intent also.  They literally have to make this judgement call all the time. Now they can’t explicitly say in the rules that refs judge in their own opinion, but anyone loosely following the games sees this happen very frequently. Bit flummoxed by you debating it to be honest.

[gouki88]

I mean in general I would really only like to see players ejected if they wind up and throw a punch or clothesline a guy or shove him into the stands. I get what people are saying about the rules, but I think face contact was completely accidental and I don’t think the jersey part was particularly malicious. In real time it seemed like he tried to hold him up. So I think a flagrant 1 would have been ok.

Intent is irrelevant

That’s actually not how they ref it. There are definitely very subjective elements involved, chiefly the refs making the decisions. Someone else in this thread already mentioned greens history. That is something they have admitted they have considered over the years (greens kick in the finals being the most famous example). We can pretend they don’t judge intent but they pretty obviously consider it.

Where?

If you really want me dig up some articles on this I can probably find them. But maybe I can make this even easier. If Marcus smart is throwing a pass and Bruce brown runs into and Marcus smart hits him very hard in the face following through on the pass. You believe that if smart went up to him after a hard foul and got up and hit him the same speed power and spot as his pass follow through with his he doesn’t get penalized in one situation more than the other? That seems like a pretty hard position to defend.

Those aren't comparable, as a pass follow through would not qualify as excessive contact (or maybe even unnecessary), whereas the latter obviously would.

Ok. But we have all heard the refs say it was a common basketball move when describing as reasoning for it being a common foul rather than a flagrant. It happened in one of the games the last few days in where a guy was dribbling and made questionable contact and the ref said it was a common basketball swing. That’s obviously a judgement call and a matter of intent (I think he stuck his arm out further than his normal running motion or leg further than his natural shooting motion so I am calling it a flagrant. They even debated this in todays game Gouki on the foul they called on grant Williams on the three point attempt. Steve javee said this will be overturned but I don’t think they will call an offensive foul cause his leg was not kicked out so far as to be unnatural motion. That’s judging intent also.  They literally have to make this judgement call all the time. Now they can’t explicitly say in the rules that refs judge in their own opinion, but anyone loosely following the games sees this happen very frequently. Bit flummoxed by you debating it to be honest.

I'm really quite confused by your line of argument. You started off with a prescriptive line about how you think the rule ought to be, rather than what it is. You then use words like accidental and malicious, neither of which are relevant. The refs are simply looking for whether it was unnecessary (which it was) and whether it was excessive (which it was). It does not matter if he meant to do it or not.

Conflating them looking at intent when examining the flagrant criteria to other foul calls isn't pertinent either. They are not judging intent on the "common basketball swing" example you use, they are judging whether or not such a motion is something one expect in a normal basketball action. Common fouls and flagrant fouls have different adjudication. Intent matters in the former in instances such as intentionally seeking out a foul call, but it does not matter in flagrant fouls.

[celticsclay]

I mean in general I would really only like to see players ejected if they wind up and throw a punch or clothesline a guy or shove him into the stands. I get what people are saying about the rules, but I think face contact was completely accidental and I don’t think the jersey part was particularly malicious. In real time it seemed like he tried to hold him up. So I think a flagrant 1 would have been ok.

Intent is irrelevant

That’s actually not how they ref it. There are definitely very subjective elements involved, chiefly the refs making the decisions. Someone else in this thread already mentioned greens history. That is something they have admitted they have considered over the years (greens kick in the finals being the most famous example). We can pretend they don’t judge intent but they pretty obviously consider it.

Where?

If you really want me dig up some articles on this I can probably find them. But maybe I can make this even easier. If Marcus smart is throwing a pass and Bruce brown runs into and Marcus smart hits him very hard in the face following through on the pass. You believe that if smart went up to him after a hard foul and got up and hit him the same speed power and spot as his pass follow through with his he doesn’t get penalized in one situation more than the other? That seems like a pretty hard position to defend.

Those aren't comparable, as a pass follow through would not qualify as excessive contact (or maybe even unnecessary), whereas the latter obviously would.

Ok. But we have all heard the refs say it was a common basketball move when describing as reasoning for it being a common foul rather than a flagrant. It happened in one of the games the last few days in where a guy was dribbling and made questionable contact and the ref said it was a common basketball swing. That’s obviously a judgement call and a matter of intent (I think he stuck his arm out further than his normal running motion or leg further than his natural shooting motion so I am calling it a flagrant. They even debated this in todays game Gouki on the foul they called on grant Williams on the three point attempt. Steve javee said this will be overturned but I don’t think they will call an offensive foul cause his leg was not kicked out so far as to be unnatural motion. That’s judging intent also.  They literally have to make this judgement call all the time. Now they can’t explicitly say in the rules that refs judge in their own opinion, but anyone loosely following the games sees this happen very frequently. Bit flummoxed by you debating it to be honest.

I'm really quite confused by your line of argument. You started off with a prescriptive line about how you think the rule ought to be, rather than what it is. You then use words like accidental and malicious, neither of which are relevant. The refs are simply looking for whether it was unnecessary (which it was) and whether it was excessive (which it was). It does not matter if he meant to do it or not.

Conflating them looking at intent when examining the flagrant criteria to other foul calls isn't pertinent either. They are not judging intent on the "common basketball swing" example you use, they are judging whether or not such a motion is something one expect in a normal basketball action. Common fouls and flagrant fouls have different adjudication. Intent matters in the former in instances such as intentionally seeking out a foul call, but it does not matter in flagrant fouls.

I think the three point shooting rule where they decide whether or not it is a flagrant foul based on if they judge the players leg to be in a natural motion to be an extremely strong example of how the refs look at intent when deciding to call a flagrant, or in more extreme cases eject someone. I don’t really know how you can disagree with this and not admit that the refs sometimes consider intent when deciding to call a flagrant. (Is his body naturally carrying him that way or is he intentionally kicking his leg out to create contact) I acknowledge  it doesn’t specifically say this in the rules cause the league won’t write a rule in a way that leads to a grey area. If you disagree with this we can just agree to disagree because refs making judgements on intent is something I feel I have seen half a dozen times in the playoffs alone. If you are not seeing any of this then we are too far apart to reach a resolution so can just move on to a more exciting topic. Like hopefully the Celtics coming out strong next game.

[celticsclay]

Anyone think the 76ers can still win without Embid tonight? Sounds like Butler is going to play (that was a real weird one game absence). I guess this is a good night to see if Harden can string together a couple of high scoring games. Curious about the other game, think Suns probably take it but they need the aggressive version of Ayton.

[Vermont Green]

Anyone think the 76ers can still win without Embid tonight? Sounds like Butler is going to play (that was a real weird one game absence). I guess this is a good night to see if Harden can string together a couple of high scoring games. Curious about the other game, think Suns probably take it but they need the aggressive version of Ayton.

The Suns are favored by 6 points and that seems fair to me.  PHO is much better than UTA and I think better than DAL.

As to PHI, Harden has not played like a star for some time, certainly not recently.  And if Harden does not play like a star, I don't see how PHI, without Embiid, can beat MIA.  Maybe this will snap Harden out of whatever funk he has been in.  I don't expect that, but it is certainly an opportunity for him to just take over and see if he can steal a win for them.

[tazzmaniac]

Anyone think the 76ers can still win without Embid tonight? Sounds like Butler is going to play (that was a real weird one game absence). I guess this is a good night to see if Harden can string together a couple of high scoring games. Curious about the other game, think Suns probably take it but they need the aggressive version of Ayton.

It is one game.  Anything can happen.  Lowry is supposed to be out.  The Heat are an easier defensive matchup than the Raptors.  Herro, Robinson, Strus are exploitable not just by Harden but by Maxey.  If Harden even in his depleted state can't exploit them that will say a lot. 

The Sixers without Embiid or Harden beat a full-strength Heat team in their last regular season game.  That was with Niang and Milsap in the starting lineup and Jordan getting way more minutes than he should.  Maxey had 28 and Milton/Korkmas combined for 38.   

In 2017/18 when Embiid suffered his first orbital fracture, he missed the 1st two games of the 1st round playoff series with the Heat which ended up being split.  Embiid comes back for the 3rd game and the Sixers win the series 4-1.  Could history repeat? 

[celticsclay]

Anyone think the 76ers can still win without Embid tonight? Sounds like Butler is going to play (that was a real weird one game absence). I guess this is a good night to see if Harden can string together a couple of high scoring games. Curious about the other game, think Suns probably take it but they need the aggressive version of Ayton.

It is one game.  Anything can happen.  Lowry is supposed to be out.  The Heat are an easier defensive matchup than the Raptors.  Herro, Robinson, Strus are exploitable not just by Harden but by Maxey.  If Harden even in his depleted state can't exploit them that will say a lot. 

The Sixers without Embiid or Harden beat a full-strength Heat team in their last regular season game.  That was with Niang and Milsap in the starting lineup and Jordan getting way more minutes than he should.  Maxey had 28 and Milton/Korkmas combined for 38.   

In 2017/18 when Embiid suffered his first orbital fracture, he missed the 1st two games of the 1st round playoff series with the Heat which ended up being split.  Embiid comes back for the 3rd game and the Sixers win the series 4-1.  Could history repeat?

I think about these same things. I kind of want to place a friendly wager on 76ers but am worried about doc playing DAJ 25 minutes

[tazzmaniac]

Anyone think the 76ers can still win without Embid tonight? Sounds like Butler is going to play (that was a real weird one game absence). I guess this is a good night to see if Harden can string together a couple of high scoring games. Curious about the other game, think Suns probably take it but they need the aggressive version of Ayton.

It is one game.  Anything can happen.  Lowry is supposed to be out.  The Heat are an easier defensive matchup than the Raptors.  Herro, Robinson, Strus are exploitable not just by Harden but by Maxey.  If Harden even in his depleted state can't exploit them that will say a lot. 

The Sixers without Embiid or Harden beat a full-strength Heat team in their last regular season game.  That was with Niang and Milsap in the starting lineup and Jordan getting way more minutes than he should.  Maxey had 28 and Milton/Korkmas combined for 38.   

In 2017/18 when Embiid suffered his first orbital fracture, he missed the 1st two games of the 1st round playoff series with the Heat which ended up being split.  Embiid comes back for the 3rd game and the Sixers win the series 4-1.  Could history repeat?

I think about these same things. I kind of want to place a friendly wager on 76ers but am worried about doc playing DAJ 25 minutes

Doc doesn't have too many options.  There's Jordan, Paul, Milsap and Bassey.  Paul has looked pretty good in limited minutes.  Bassey is a rookie with limited minutes and he's been injured.   Jordan and Milsap are competing for who sucks worse.  Given the small size of Miami maybe Niang or Harris get some minutes at center.  Go 5 out to get Bam away from the basket and let Harden and Maxey drive. 

You could be really daring and pick the Sixers to win the series.  That ought to be good odds right now. 

[celticsclay]

Anyone think the 76ers can still win without Embid tonight? Sounds like Butler is going to play (that was a real weird one game absence). I guess this is a good night to see if Harden can string together a couple of high scoring games. Curious about the other game, think Suns probably take it but they need the aggressive version of Ayton.

It is one game.  Anything can happen.  Lowry is supposed to be out.  The Heat are an easier defensive matchup than the Raptors.  Herro, Robinson, Strus are exploitable not just by Harden but by Maxey.  If Harden even in his depleted state can't exploit them that will say a lot. 

The Sixers without Embiid or Harden beat a full-strength Heat team in their last regular season game.  That was with Niang and Milsap in the starting lineup and Jordan getting way more minutes than he should.  Maxey had 28 and Milton/Korkmas combined for 38.   

In 2017/18 when Embiid suffered his first orbital fracture, he missed the 1st two games of the 1st round playoff series with the Heat which ended up being split.  Embiid comes back for the 3rd game and the Sixers win the series 4-1.  Could history repeat?

I think about these same things. I kind of want to place a friendly wager on 76ers but am worried about doc playing DAJ 25 minutes

Doc doesn't have too many options.  There's Jordan, Paul, Milsap and Bassey.  Paul has looked pretty good in limited minutes.  Bassey is a rookie with limited minutes and he's been injured.   Jordan and Milsap are competing for who sucks worse.  Given the small size of Miami maybe Niang or Harris get some minutes at center.  Go 5 out to get Bam away from the basket and let Harden and Maxey drive. 

You could be really daring and pick the Sixers to win the series.  That ought to be good odds right now.

Honestly I would prefer Millsap or bassey than Jordan. He is just so darn slow and has three foot range.

[gouki88]

Lots of empty seats in Miami

[liam]

Lots of empty seats in Miami

Always...

[gouki88]

This fullcourt press by Miami is giving Philly (and Harden) absolute fits

[Moranis]

The Heat aren't very big so the Sixers can get away with small lineups a lot easier against them then if they were playing either Milwaukee or Boston.

[gouki88]

I still want Paul Reed

[Goldstar88]

Miami is so overrated.