Celtics (28-4) at Blazers (19-12) 12/30

[Redz]

The game played out a lot like the GS game.  The Celts got up early, then put it in cruise control, gave their opponent a glimmer of hope, then ended up getting out-hustled.  Cruise control won't work on the road.

[Redz]

One other thing, on the broadcast end, did anyone find the player stats they were posting during the free throws completely random and useless?

Why do I need to know how many points KG scored in Game 6 of the NBA Finals during a game in December vs. Portland?  Made no sense to me. 

[crownsy]

am i the only one who has noticed absolutely horrific reffing of the past four games? you'd almost think they are trying to send us on a bit of a skid in order to give the lakers the edge over us in overall record, giving them home court advantage in the finals...

on a side note, if that bogus call the refs made involving 6 players on the court does not come with some sort of immediate rule change, could we start seeing teams try to take advantage of this at crucial points in games more often? makes me sick...blazers fans will say that 1 point doesn't matter, but it's not about the point, it's about momentum in the game, and things like that destroy any momentum a team may be gaining.

IT did matter, its a 3 point swing. If they don't get the basket, we still get the tech.

Ergo, pierce's shot with 40 seconds left puts us up one, not down one.

Thus they can't run 24 seconds off the clock, and even if they hit a shot, they would have only been up 1, at the worst 2.

Instead they wen't up 3 and got to run us off the 3 point line.

I was at the game last night in Portland. I think the 6-on-5 thing DID affect the outcome. The biggest effect was that I think the C's lost their composure and their focus after that weird play. While that's the players' fault, it would have been a non-issue in the second half if the refs had handled it differently.

Honestly, I can't wrap my brain around that call. How can you allow a basket in that situation? I just don't get it. But anyhow, fair or unfair, I can't help but think teams would use this 6-on-5 thing as a strategy in the future. Why wouldn't you pull a 6-on-5 to get an automatic 2-for-1? I'm still just baffled over this.

you'd need to get the same group of morons though, to be fairer to the officals than they deserve.

The problem was apperntly this crew can't count. Another crew would hopefully notice that 5+1= 6 long before the inbounds or during the play and whisle it dead.

The problem was none of these chuckle heads last night even noticed it until it was pointed out and explained to them post play.

[crownsy]

One other thing, on the broadcast end, did anyone find the player stats they were posting during the free throws completely random and useless?

Why do I need to know how many points KG scored in Game 6 of the NBA Finals during a game in December vs. Portland?  Made no sense to me. 

that was bugging me too, but i think they were doing like a "this was the best of 08'" thing since this is the last game pre new years.

It did bug the crap out of me as well though.

[Hoops]

am i the only one who has noticed absolutely horrific reffing of the past four games? you'd almost think they are trying to send us on a bit of a skid in order to give the lakers the edge over us in overall record, giving them home court advantage in the finals...

on a side note, if that bogus call the refs made involving 6 players on the court does not come with some sort of immediate rule change, could we start seeing teams try to take advantage of this at crucial points in games more often? makes me sick...blazers fans will say that 1 point doesn't matter, but it's not about the point, it's about momentum in the game, and things like that destroy any momentum a team may be gaining.

IT did matter, its a 3 point swing. If they don't get the basket, we still get the tech.

Ergo, pierce's shot with 40 seconds left puts us up one, not down one.

Thus they can't run 24 seconds off the clock, and even if they hit a shot, they would have only been up 1, at the worst 2.

Instead they wen't up 3 and got to run us off the 3 point line.

I was at the game last night in Portland. I think the 6-on-5 thing DID affect the outcome. The biggest effect was that I think the C's lost their composure and their focus after that weird play. While that's the players' fault, it would have been a non-issue in the second half if the refs had handled it differently.

Honestly, I can't wrap my brain around that call. How can you allow a basket in that situation? I just don't get it. But anyhow, fair or unfair, I can't help but think teams would use this 6-on-5 thing as a strategy in the future. Why wouldn't you pull a 6-on-5 to get an automatic 2-for-1? I'm still just baffled over this.

you'd need to get the same group of morons though, to be fairer to the officals than they deserve.

The problem was apperntly this crew can't count. Another crew would hopefully notice that 5+1= 6 long before the inbounds or during the play and whisle it dead.

The problem was none of these chuckle heads last night even noticed it until it was pointed out and explained to them post play.

No, I completely understand that a ref crew that knows how to count would have prevented this. And I'm sure the NBA is going to be hyper-vigilant about this now. But I think there are still easy ways to sneak a player on the court. For example, say your team gets a defensive rebound and races up the court in transition. I think it would be completely plausible to have a guy make a quick cut from the bench to the rim for an alley-oop before the refs blow the whistle and stop the play. And as the rule has been explained to me, if you can put two points on the board before the refs stop the play, they can't take the points off the board.

A technical free throw doesn't offset the advantage gained. Thus, it seems like there's an incentive to game the system.

[crownsy]

am i the only one who has noticed absolutely horrific reffing of the past four games? you'd almost think they are trying to send us on a bit of a skid in order to give the lakers the edge over us in overall record, giving them home court advantage in the finals...

on a side note, if that bogus call the refs made involving 6 players on the court does not come with some sort of immediate rule change, could we start seeing teams try to take advantage of this at crucial points in games more often? makes me sick...blazers fans will say that 1 point doesn't matter, but it's not about the point, it's about momentum in the game, and things like that destroy any momentum a team may be gaining.

IT did matter, its a 3 point swing. If they don't get the basket, we still get the tech.

Ergo, pierce's shot with 40 seconds left puts us up one, not down one.

Thus they can't run 24 seconds off the clock, and even if they hit a shot, they would have only been up 1, at the worst 2.

Instead they wen't up 3 and got to run us off the 3 point line.

I was at the game last night in Portland. I think the 6-on-5 thing DID affect the outcome. The biggest effect was that I think the C's lost their composure and their focus after that weird play. While that's the players' fault, it would have been a non-issue in the second half if the refs had handled it differently.

Honestly, I can't wrap my brain around that call. How can you allow a basket in that situation? I just don't get it. But anyhow, fair or unfair, I can't help but think teams would use this 6-on-5 thing as a strategy in the future. Why wouldn't you pull a 6-on-5 to get an automatic 2-for-1? I'm still just baffled over this.

you'd need to get the same group of morons though, to be fairer to the officals than they deserve.

The problem was apperntly this crew can't count. Another crew would hopefully notice that 5+1= 6 long before the inbounds or during the play and whisle it dead.

The problem was none of these chuckle heads last night even noticed it until it was pointed out and explained to them post play.

No, I completely understand that a ref crew that knows how to count would have prevented this. And I'm sure the NBA is going to be hyper-vigilant about this now. But I think there are still easy ways to sneak a player on the court. For example, say your team gets a defensive rebound and races up the court in transition. I think it would be completely plausible to have a guy make a quick cut from the bench to the rim for an alley-oop before the refs blow the whistle and stop the play. And as the rule has been explained to me, if you can put two points on the board before the refs stop the play, they can't take the points off the board.

A technical free throw doesn't offset the advantage gained. Thus, it seems like there's an incentive to game the system.

thats true, i didn't think of it that way, TP.

it really could be kind of a scum bag tactic when you think about it. hopefully its atrociousness will keep teams from doing it.

[Redz]

One other thing, on the broadcast end, did anyone find the player stats they were posting during the free throws completely random and useless?

Why do I need to know how many points KG scored in Game 6 of the NBA Finals during a game in December vs. Portland?  Made no sense to me. 

that was bugging me too, but i think they were doing like a "this was the best of 08'" thing since this is the last game pre new years.

It did bug the crap out of me as well though.

OK, at least that's some sort of explanation for why they might be doing that. 

[crownsy]

One other thing, on the broadcast end, did anyone find the player stats they were posting during the free throws completely random and useless?

Why do I need to know how many points KG scored in Game 6 of the NBA Finals during a game in December vs. Portland?  Made no sense to me. 

that was bugging me too, but i think they were doing like a "this was the best of 08'" thing since this is the last game pre new years.

It did bug the crap out of me as well though.

OK, at least that's some sort of explanation for why they might be doing that. 

i wish they had explained it, it bugged me for 2 quarters, and i still don't know if thats why they were doing it, its just an assumption i made.

not very good production value out of CSN if that was the case.

[Redz]

One other thing, on the broadcast end, did anyone find the player stats they were posting during the free throws completely random and useless?

Why do I need to know how many points KG scored in Game 6 of the NBA Finals during a game in December vs. Portland?  Made no sense to me. 

that was bugging me too, but i think they were doing like a "this was the best of 08'" thing since this is the last game pre new years.

It did bug the crap out of me as well though.

OK, at least that's some sort of explanation for why they might be doing that. 

i wish they had explained it, it bugged me for 2 quarters, and i still don't know if thats why they were doing it, its just an assumption i made.

not very good production value out of CSN if that was the case.

Sounds like your theory is right.  I just kinda like to see some stats of what a guy has done THAT GAME when he gets to the line (unless he gets to the line a bunch of times, then I get mixing it up a bit), but someone made a decision to use this stats across the board last night. Oh well.

[jdpapa3]

Anyone else see a conspiracy a little bit in how none of the major outlets are reporting this? It's barely a blurb on the espn recap. You would think a play like this would get major airtime.

It's stuff like this that makes me think the NBA is corrupt. They'd love the Lakers to get HCA and then beat Boston.

[Redz]

Anyone else see a conspiracy a little bit in how none of the major outlets are reporting this? It's barely a blurb on the espn recap. You would think a play like this would get major airtime.

It's stuff like this that makes me think the NBA is corrupt. They'd love the Lakers to get HCA and then beat Boston.

Reporting what?

[nickagneta]

I think what some people are forgeting about that play with the 6 on five is that not only would the basket not have counted and the Celtics would have gotten a technical that they made but they would have gotten the ball back with 10.1 seconds left on the clock and not 3 seconds. With a quick timeout and a decent play written up the Celtics could easily have had enough time to run a play and hit another basket making the halftime lead 9 or 10 instead of 5.

I think 10 down at the half and making a dumb mistake that cost them a close halftime lead would have demoralized the Blazers and the Celtics would have cruised in the second half. Instead they felt empowered that they had a chance because they screwed up and yet were rewarded for it instead of penalized and they felt they had a chance afterall even without their best player.

[TatteredOnMySleeve]

Anyone else see a conspiracy a little bit in how none of the major outlets are reporting this? It's barely a blurb on the espn recap. You would think a play like this would get major airtime.

It's stuff like this that makes me think the NBA is corrupt. They'd love the Lakers to get HCA and then beat Boston.

Its safe to say that if the celtics scored with 6 men on the court, it would be front page news on every sports outlet

[RebusRankin]

Anyone else see a conspiracy a little bit in how none of the major outlets are reporting this? It's barely a blurb on the espn recap. You would think a play like this would get major airtime.

It's stuff like this that makes me think the NBA is corrupt. They'd love the Lakers to get HCA and then beat Boston.

There's an article on SI.COM but Thompson calling it a travesty.

[Hoops]

I think what some people are forgeting about that play with the 6 on five is that not only would the basket not have counted and the Celtics would have gotten a technical that they made but they would have gotten the ball back with 10.1 seconds left on the clock and not 3 seconds. With a quick timeout and a decent play written up the Celtics could easily have had enough time to run a play and hit another basket making the halftime lead 9 or 10 instead of 5.

I think 10 down at the half and making a dumb mistake that cost them a close halftime lead would have demoralized the Blazers and the Celtics would have cruised in the second half. Instead they felt empowered that they had a chance because they screwed up and yet were rewarded for it instead of penalized and they felt they had a chance afterall even without their best player.

Totally agree - TP. Again, the C's players deserve blame for letting that play disrupt their focus in the second half. But they were playing like they were in control in the first half and played rattled in the second half. It was a big deal.