Curt Schilling was at game 2, and Curt being Curt, of course has an opinion. An interesting take on Kobe:

"Who doesn't know Kobe Bryant right?," asks Schilling. "I only know what I have heard, starting awhile back with the entire Shaq debacle. I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on or about him other than to know that people feel he might be one of the 4-5 greatest players to ever lace it up. What I do know is what I got to see up close and hear, was unexpected. From the first tip until about 4 minutes left in the game I saw and heard this guy bitch at his teammates. Every TO he came to the bench pissed, and a few of them he went to other guys and yelled about something they weren't doing, or something they did wrong. No dialog about 'hey let's go, let's get after it' or whatever. He spent the better part of 3.5 quarters pissed off and ranting at the non-execution or lack of, of his team. Then when they made what almost was a historic run in the 4th, during a TO, he got down on the floor and basically said 'Let's f'ing go, right now, right here' or something to that affect.

"I am not making this observation in a good or bad way, I have no idea how the guys in the NBA play or do things like this, but I thought it was a fascinating bit of insight for me to watch someone in another sport who is in the position of a team leader and how he interacted with his team and teammates. Watching the other 11 guys, every time out it was high fives and 'Hey nice work, let's get after it' or something to that affect. He walked off the floor, obligatory skin contact on the high five, and sat on the bench stone faced or pissed off, the whole game. Just weird to see another sport and how it all works. I would assume that's his style and how he plays and what works for him because when I saw the leader board for scoring in the post season his name sat up top at 31+ a game, can't argue with that. But as a fan I was watching the whole thing, Kobe, his teammates and then the after effects of conversations. He'd yell at someone, make a point, or send a message, turn and walk away, and more than once the person on the other end would roll eyes or give a 'whatever dude' look."

If Curt Schilling isn't aware of who Kobe was until the Shaq debacle in 2005, I don't really think he should have much of an opinion on it.

Ok...?

Umm ... probably not a subject the NBA really wants anyone to bring up any more than necessary ;)

That's kind of the point, he has no clue about basketball, he's just relaying the personal observations of an outsider.

I just think that it's funny that the Lakers and their fans can whine about the FT discrepancy when they're SO often a beneficiary of the same thing.

While I laugh about the Patriots constant search for Bulletin Board Material, and think that if you need it to function, I'm sure Lamar Odom isn't doing his team any favors..

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketb...en_for_od.html

Free hint for Lamar... if you spent more time with your head in the game (his own coach called him confused on the floor), and less time designing "officially licensed "Boston Sucks" U-Man T-shirts"... your team might have come out of the first two games with a split.

I'm whining in the same sense that you are whining about there not being a problem about the refs. I think my first post post-game said I was not used to being on the wrong end of a poor reffed game. The Jazz were also intentionally fouling the Lakers too which explained a lot of the FT variation. They had to stop the clock as much as possible late in the game

Part of it is going to a charity, I'm all for it

It's the most "rigged" out of the top three, and by far

Serious question - do you think that Kings/Lakers conference finals was rigged? Or is it only when the Lakers lose?

I'm not sure how much of the NBA conspiracy theory talk that I buy. But I do think the refs let the Lakers get back into the game by suddenly not calling the ticky tacky fouls late in the game. I don't think the NBA wanted to see the Lakers get blown out by 25 in that game. I also don't believe that the refs go into a game with some notion on calling a certain amount of fouls towards one team compared to the other. There is only so much the NBA can "will" a certain to to win. If the C's shot 30% in both games from the field, no amount of hope from the NBA could have kept Boston in the series. Not without it looking painfully obviously.

But you're kidding yourself if you think the NBA doesn't dictate, to a certain extent, the matchups they want to see.

There's no question that the NBA has always "felt" rigged. I guess that can be explained away by the fact that every losing team's fans can point to inconsistent refereeing, as I said.

I just don't buy that Stern and company would risk prison time for a league that really isn't that great or popular. If it's "rigged" (put in quotes because that word can have a diverse definition), how much less successful would the league be if it wasn't? I just don't see that there's that much to gain.

And there's no way the referees are in on it, at all. Quite a few of them have had some problems with the feds in recent years (taxes and gambling), and there's no way they don't put that on the table for a favorable plea bargain. I really doubt that Tim Donaghy takes Stern's secrets to prison with him.

Yes, because I am not a hypocrite. Stop trying to corner me. I know what I am talking about, and unlike some, I'm not some hypocritical bastard who doesn't use rational evidence to assess every situation.

Although, I find it funny you picked the smaller, easier to happen discrepancy. Funny, why didn't you pick the FT discrepancy? Surely you would want the most outrageous difference to be the one that "trips" me up, right?

But, no, that would point that it actually was a ridiculous difference, and thus your whole argument would go down like a house of cards. We wouldn't want that. :rolleyes:

Actually, I believe Bug was referring to the fact Kobe is one of the most fouled players out there (based on FTs taken), so the lack of them stands out. Pierce is the same sort of player for Boston; I think he actually led the league in FTs, although not sure about that.

Basically, all the reports I have heard locally is that the Lakers pretty much gave up trying to go inside because they were getting hacked everywhere and no fouls were being called (and they would get ticky tack stuff called on them at the other end, like Borat's quick two fouls or the two fouls that put Kobe on the bench in the second). The FT discrepancy was even worse in the first half--19-2. So you missed the worst half by far with respect to this discussion.

I agree. A foul is also a foul no matter what uniforms are being worn, or what court the foul happens on. Supposedly. :rolleyes:

The NBA's system with fouls is just maddening.

Howard led the league, Lebron was second, Kobe was 6th, and Pierce was 18th

:+1:

I wanted to quote and put an emphasis on this, because it highlights what I have been saying all along (and I think my message is getting lost a bit amongst all the foul cat-fighting). And that's that, regardless of whether officiating had a hand in how this game turned out, the Lakers lost this game because of many different flaws in their game, and the Celtics won it because of their strengths and adaptability and plain, flat good talent. The C's outplayed the Lakers, and that's that.

Really?

Heh, I coulda sworn I heard Pierce's rating there was one of the highest from some talking ahead or another (not that 18th is bad).

I couldn't find a total FT's taken, but I went by amount taken per game.

That's the problem, molson. If the officiating were even, then, yeah, you adjust and move on. If, however, you're hacked left and right and get no calls, while the other team is going to the line on light bumps, it's kinda hard to adjust to that, and to not get frustrated.

Yeah, I don't recall what stat the talking head was basing that on. :shurg:

And the losses in that series? And how do the C's wins match up?

Seriously. Why do you feel the need to fall back on repeated ad hominems to make your arguments? Isn't it enough to argue facts, rather than insulting the people you are arguing with by questioning their rationality, and to a degree, their intelligence?

Really, it's very insulting. This one wasn't aimed at me, but you have done it more than once already to me. I am not trying to call into question your rationality on the subject; have the courtesy to show equal respect and not do it back at us.

Obviously, Mr. Bug didn't think the question was insulting when he responded,

"But you're kidding yourself if you think the NBA doesn't dictate, to a certain extent, the matchups they want to see."

A lot of people believe that, it's not a fringe idea. It was a serious question. (And it's certainly crossed my mind more than once).

I'm a lot more easy going and not as smart as Chiefy :)

At the end of the day, it just kind of kills the enjoyment of the NBA. The league influences matchups, the home teams win because of the refs, the stars get all the calls. I don't see how anyone who believes any of those things could even watch the game. If they don't, then it naturally follows that those who are watching the games and constantly still bring those things up are either sore losers or just trying to get under your skin. One can try to ignore those sentiments, but they're everywhere, and they out-number actual basketball talk by 10-1.

Maybe I should just stay off the internet and enjoy the games.........

Sorry, it's just that you have taken some shots at my and Bug's ability to see past our bias and assess things rationally, and I have been consistent in presenting evidence and qualifying what I have been saying. So when you continue to make those sort of inferences about me, it is insulting to me.

Sorry if that makes me sensitive, but if so, so be it.

I asked you straight up if you were a conspiracy guy, you said no, and any such inferences i made since then were not directed towards you or were unintentional.

The second question above was asked well after our conspiracy talk, and is clearly a question that suggests you believe I would back off on what I was saying if it favored my team. That essentially questions my ability to see past my own influences.

So actually, you did make such an inference after asking me about the conspiracy talk. I am pretty sure you made other, similar inferences as well since then, but frankly, I'm not interested in spending tons of time on this. This one leaped to mind and is enough.

I'm so glad I'm not in this discussion :)

"tainted" doesn't equal "rigged".

I do wonder if you would back off on what you were saying if it was your favorite team. It's not a trap, just a question. Are you so entrenched in the FT disparity thing that every game with too high a ratio is automatically suspect (from a fairness standpoint). And thus, does that apply to future Lakers games, and the entire Jazz series? (looking at the series as a whole, the Lakers had more FTs in 5 of the games, for a total advantage of 231-172. The Hawks got to the line more than the Celtics, 220-152, as did the Cavs, 205-175, and they were virtually tied with the Pistons.)

My complaint on you is not about conspiracy theories, but about you questioning my ability to see past my bias to the evidence at hand. Tainted, rigged, makes no difference in that.

And I already answered your second question. There is a point at which you have to wonder why there is such a disparity. And that would apply to all games.

I could argue that you are so entrenched in ignoring the disparity that you will refuse to acknowledge the possibility that the refs may have been influenced by the home crowd.

Somebody brought up an actual foul call on Kobe that shouldn't have been called and I agreed. All you're doing is relying on the total FTs at the end of the game. All of I've been saying it that it's silly and illogical to start with a default ideal of both teams fouling equally. That and blaming the loss on the refs ("And if that game is called straight, maybe the Lakers go back with a split right now. Lakers' fans have every right to complain") which you've now apparently backed off on.

I'm sure the Celtics got plenty of calls. Some (maybe less) went the other way. I'm sure if I sat down and counted the breaks in game 3 there'd be at least 20 for each team. Plenty of stuff for the losing team to complain about. Maybe it would be 23-18, maybe it would even be 25-15. But whoever's on the short end is still a crybaby if they pin the loss on the refs.

Games 3 and 4 are going to be must-wins for the Lakers.

Odom needs to step up and be more aggressive on offense and defense. Kobe needs to take over earlier in the game in order to free up their perimeter shooters. Every purple-shirt on the court should concentrate on pulling down those defensive rebounds. Jackson should implement a straight-up man-to-man defense that doesn't need constant rotation (the one we saw in games 1 and 2, which the Celtics routinely broke down with their ridiculous crosscourt passes that the Lakers can't seem to intercept).

Actualy, CR, me and my friend were talking about Doc Rivers while watching Game 2 in a pub, and we basically deduced that he had absolutely no idea what he was even doing in the Celtics bench. He's just the guy whose ass everyone rubs their hands to before coming into the game... other than that, he isn't really coaching... KG et al seem to be running their own shit on the court.

If the league really influenced every playoff series that much, the San Antonio Spurs would not have three titles.

There's also assistant coach Tom Thibodeau who was brought in to run the defense and probably most of the actual coaching.

Between bitching about FT's and the Celtics nearly blowing a 24 point lead, I'm glad I missed this game.

Minus the Lakers, what other option in the West is there? Sonics? Blazers? Warriors? Jazz? Clippers? Suns? Mavs? Kings? Rockets?

Every single one of those markets is bigger than San Antonio.

Less than 12 hours to go. It's win or die for the Lakers, the ever crucial Game 3.

Here's to hoping PhilJax get his troops' shit together and puts up a good fight tonight.

I'll be surprised if the Lakers don't win today.

The Lakers should win tonight. They've got the crowd, home court, and the refs in their corner just like in the 2002 Western Conference Finals.

Hopefully Rondo's face won't foul Kobe's elbow again :)

I'm guessing Kobe shoots 14+ FTs today.

Should be a good game...if the Lakers are going to win one game they ought to win tonight...key for the Celts is just not to let a loss (if they lose) mushroom and turn into more than just a loss of one game

I'm going to have to try really hard to both avoid this thread and any mentioning of the final score so I can catch the replay tonight.

like me with euro 2008

This seems oddly appropriate in light of todays news...

SI