Locker room talk: rolling basketball thread

linebaugh

Well-known member
So when they say no-one has got this sfatline before, it may be literally true.... but several people have scored way more points (which is surely the most important thing right?) just not got as many rebounds etc.

What I'm asking is, how legendary/significant etc is this performance? Good, great or historic?
Its one of the greatest performances ever. You can count on your fingers how many have had comparable games
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
The come back was even more insane. The mavs were down 9 with 30 seconds left. This was the first time in 13 thousand instances a team had been down by that amount with that time left and came back and won
 

sus

Well-known member
I texted Linebaugh about it next day it was a big deal I try to be in contact with that hepatitis spreader as little as possible
 

luka

Well-known member
part of the reason people love luka is that he is a pasty, pudgy, slow moving white man with zero muscle tone. incongruous looking.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
You're joining Craig David and talking about yourself in the third person... but nothing incongruous that I see.
 

Leo

Well-known member
Saw an interesting stat: as LeBron closes in on Kareem's all-time scoring record, he has 2,223 three-point buckets verses just one for Kareem.
 

Leo

Well-known member
He's great. My post was not a shot at him, more an admiration of Kareem for being able to reach those heights before three-pointers existed.

What's with the "uppity" remark?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
One thing I notice more and more when I see basketball clips is people moanng and saying it was a "travel" or "carry" (what's the difference?), and in fact saying "I don't watch NBA anymore cos they don't apply the rules" or, worse, claiming they apply them unjustly with stars getting an easy ride.

So, I'd like to ask - to what extent are these calls clear cut and objective and to what extent is there room for debate and referee discretion? And do you agree with the above claims?
 

Leo

Well-known member
I do not agree with the above claims. traveling rarely gets called, mostly because player don't travel much. and there's always room for debate and referee discretion, but it doesn't seem to be any sort of factor here.
 

sus

Well-known member
One thing I notice more and more when I see basketball clips is people moanng and saying it was a "travel" or "carry" (what's the difference?), and in fact saying "I don't watch NBA anymore cos they don't apply the rules" or, worse, claiming they apply them unjustly with stars getting an easy ride.

So, I'd like to ask - to what extent are these calls clear cut and objective and to what extent is there room for debate and referee discretion? And do you agree with the above claims?
Some heads believe that a lot of modern drive/penetration + dribble technique is built atop traveling. I think the NBA has a somewhat flexible relationship between letter of law and enforcement, see also 3-second violations. It's a bit like how speeding tickets work, at least in America. Plenty of places you can go 10 or 20kph and not ruffle any feathers. But you're technically breaking the law and could in theory be ticketed and different jurisdictions/individual officers will enforce it differently. It makes it a bit of a minefield, but partial enforcement is also an officiating strategy for keeping abuses under control. The NBA also thinks a lot about its entertainment product and what sort of spirit of law/play they want to guide/enforce through officiating. Is offense getting too overpowered? Defense? Is this hurting how the game is played, i.e. the entertainment product? Is the game more boring? Are there less highlight-worthy, viral type clips? Flashy offensive moves and dunks attract a lotta eyes, get shown on ESPN and circulate on Twitter. That stuff is really good for the NBA as a global media company, and I'd imagine that fact affects how tight they call e.g. travels.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Some heads believe that a lot of modern drive/penetration + dribble technique is built atop traveling. I think the NBA has a somewhat flexible relationship between letter of law and enforcement, see also 3-second violations. It's a bit like how speeding tickets work, at least in America. Plenty of places you can go 10 or 20kph and not ruffle any feathers. But you're technically breaking the law and could in theory be ticketed and different jurisdictions/individual officers will enforce it differently. It makes it a bit of a minefield, but partial enforcement is also an officiating strategy for keeping abuses under control. The NBA also thinks a lot about its entertainment product and what sort of spirit of law/play they want to guide/enforce through officiating. Is offense getting too overpowered? Defense? Is this hurting how the game is played, i.e. the entertainment product? Is the game more boring? Are there less highlight-worthy, viral type clips? Flashy offensive moves and dunks attract a lotta eyes, get shown on ESPN and circulate on Twitter. That stuff is really good for the NBA as a global media company, and I'd imagine that fact affects how tight they call e.g. travels.
Makes sense but I'm surprised you guys are happy with that when you were all "rules are rules" when it came to the clock "grey areas are not fair" etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: sus

sus

Well-known member
Makes sense but I'm surprised you guys are happy with that when you were all "rules are rules" when it came to the clock "grey areas are not fair" etc
Ha yeah fair enough. I mean, people are pretty upset with the way these calls can be highly arbitrary and up to the discretion of the ref. Lotta purists are mad that traveling doesn't get called enough; lots of younger fans are frustrated that their favorite player gets randomly called for traveling pulling moves that X rival team's star doesn't get called for. Especially late in close games, any involvement by referees becomes suspect. People are always very mad about officiating in the NBA (both players & fans) but especially very very mad this season. The idea that a ref could decide when the clock's run out sounds totally crazy to me from afar, but it's probably more predictable and sane in practice than I'm imagining.
 
Top