Didn't you just say that a FT discrepancy isn't evidence of unfairness???

The sad thing is if the Celtics win a game 3 with an even FT discrepancy, you'll probably whine that the Lakers aren't getting the "breaks" at home like the Celtics did. No matter what happens on the court, you'll look at the FT stats, and if it's not to your liking, we'll hear it again.

Let the Laker fans whine. Cry into your cups about how unfair it all is.

Won't bother me, I've already seen what happens to the fanbase of the Boston when they lose. :)

Apparently it's similar to the Lakers fan base (see thread), and oh, EVERY other fan base (except those small-market baseball fans - they just complain about economics). It's all the same though. My team lost, wahhhhh.

And Boston fans certainly aren't immune - I've actually seen them blame losing on the local media.

In one of the worst things about sports (especially on message boards). After the complaining, others inevitably state that "they're not giving the winners enough credit", as if the winning team reads the message board and will have their feelings hurt if they there aren't enough nice things said.

Yes, I will. And I expect you to accept your own hypocrisy when and if that happens.

The first one is simply making fun of all the idiotic criticisms the Celtics have faced at each stage of their run this year. It amuses me how the arguments keep changing.

The second one is explaining that if the Lakers had won more games in the regular season, then they'd have home court advantage and would get the benefit of the "obvious referee cheating for home teams" that the Celtics will be privy to in 4 of the 7 games.

Perhaps. But did you see me posting a ton after game 1?

But your second response was basically a reply to the claims of your first.

Well, then complain that people said that's why they had a good record, not that there are complaints that the schedule was weak. The schedule was weak, that's a fact.

Straight numbers don't tell the story on FTs or fouls. It's never as simple as 30-30 or even or whatever==fair. That said, four to one is pretty hard to explain away.

First of all, don't make any assumptions about what I will do. I always try to call it as fair as I can, and I give other teams their just due all the time.

I am straight looking at the numbers and seeing what we got. There is a rational basis for what I am saying, and it's pretty clear.

And I did say FT discrepancy by itself isn't some smoking gun for unfairness. I broke it down to its literal translation--it means one team took far more FTs than the other. The reasons why take a little further observation, which I also pointed out.

That doesn't mean that discrepancy--especially one so sharp as this one--is not an element to be included in an argument for unfair calls in this game.

Fair enough, although I think it's just as wrong to dismiss those complaints as being "loser fan-itis" as it is for those fans to complain.

Complaining that the schedule is weak, for whatever reason, is pretty silly. This isn't college. They don't get to pick the schedule. All they can do is play their best against it, which they did, and still got criticized.


Not if you watched the game. The Lakers had the Celtics in the penalty midway through the 3rd and they didn't try to take advantage of that at all. Meanwhile, the Lakers were letting Powe get inside whenever he wanted and hammered him constantly.

True, I do agree that it's annoying to note a legitimately bad call and then automatically get hit with a "whiner" tag from somebody who might not even have seen the play. I just don't get how you could honestly have an issue with the FT discrepancy with how the game went down, but that's just my opinion. It's just too easy to plug in "home team" and "refs", and complain about anything, which is what it feels like you're doing.

The lakers were pretty bad for 40 minutes. If they showed up 5 minutes earlier, and played with any aggression on offense, they would have won.

Well, two of your five "idiotic criticisms" are still technically true, and two others were true at some point in time. The only one that is and always was invalid was the "can't win against the West" which was never true, to my knowledge. Not saying those putting out those criticisms were right, are right or will ever be right, but there was good reason to buy four of those five criticisms at some significant point this season.

As for the second, the Lakers played half the season without Bynum, didn't get Gasol until just before the AS break, and they played in a much tougher conference night in and night out, while the Celtics' key players missed just one stretch without KG. This is the system we have, and them's the breaks, so the Lakers just have to deal with that. But you holding that up as some kinda "see how the Lakers suck compare to the C's" argument is just ridiculous.

In light of all this FT discrepancy business, I think it's interesting to take a look at FT totals in the regular season and playoffs.

Regular Season
Lakers +3.4 (6th/30)
Celtics +0.2 (14th/30)

Playoffs
Lakers +3.3 (5th/16)
Celtics -4.2 (14th/16)

In the regular season, the biggest FT discrepancies were the Nuggets (+6.0) and the Timberwolves (-6.9). In the postseason, both the Hawks and Sixers had massive advantages (+11.0 and +9.7), while the Jazz (-5.3) and Raptors (-7.2) apparently got screwed.

Not saying the Celtics are somehow at fault for the weak schedule. It's just a fact that it was a weak schedule. And you're the one who brought it up. If you don't want the weak schedule thrown in your face, don't bring it up.



Actually, the entire game included all those FTs, so yes, even watching the game (which I did).

The Lakers do need to take better advantage of getting the Celtics in the penalty when they get there, so that is a valid criticism. As for Powe, partly a lot of fouls called on the Lakers made them a little iffy trying to take charges or stop drives, adn I think that contributed to Powe's ability to weave through the defense (that said, that was horrid, the Lakers need some serious work with that, and is one of the failings that can and maybe will cost them the series).

The Lakers were pretty bad. They completely deserved this loss. They were not the better team on the floor, and that was a fact. As I have said before, some serious flaws have been exposed in this roster set that I think will likely result in them losing this series, and maybe even badly.

But four to one. Think about that. Four FTs for every one on the other side. You can't just ignore a discrepancy that large. It's very apparent. You may think I am plugging in "home fan" and "refs", but it feels just as much like you and the other C fans will say anything to justify the discrepancy and spurn any notion that you might ahve won a game that was tilted at least slightly in your favor.

Actually, Ray Allen missed 9 games. Also, isn't this all part of the game? The Celtics made their biggest moves before the season, while the Lakers waited until before the AS break. The only thing the Lakers couldn't do anything about was their tougher schedule. Even giving them that, they were only 20-10 against the weak East, while the Celtics were 25-5 against the tough West.


Never said the Lakers suck.

I actually think the Lakers are very good and was very worried about this series coming in, but I'm very surprised at how soft they've played so far. I don't think that will continue in LA, but we'll see.

Nine games? Big whoop. Lamar missed five games. Vujacic ten. Borat 17. Ariza barely played for the Lakers. Come on, you don't really want to get into a "who missed more injury-games this season" argument do you?

As for everything else, exactly what I said. This is the system we're in, the Lakers have to accept it for what it is, and make amends for not doing it as well as the C's did. Kudos to the Celtics. Point is, you were trying to make out like the Lakers roster as it is composed is somehow derelict for not winning more games in the regular season than the Celtics. In and of itself, it's not entirely at fault, and it is disingenuous of you to disparage the team for that.


Read what I wrote again. You must have missed the "compared to the Celtics" part.

Just quoting to note I see your edit here while I was responding.

Yes, their softness is one of the big time issues exposed here, IMO. It's one of the primary reasons they could lose, and maybe should, lose this series. And I think it will continue it LA. This just isn't a very historically tough team.

What surprises me, really, is that the Celtics are so much tougher in comparison, because that was not apparent before the series. They didn't have a very strong rebounding advantage in the regular season, and you already notedc where they stood on the FT discrepancy (which suggests more of a jump shooting team, which in fact, they were, outside of Pierce).

The Celtics have been fantastic with respect to stepping up their game and changing their play to better take advantage of the weaknesses of the opponent. They should be commended for that (especially Doc Rivers, who I think is entirely behind it, from planning to motivation), and they may very well get a well-earned championship as a result.

Just please tell me you're not one of these conspiracy people.

If you do I'll have to expose the sham that was the Gasol trade.

Even though that's a joke, if you're claiming that the Celtics were helped by an incompetent third party (the refs), then ya, the Gasol trade is essentially the same thing X 1,000.

But I'm not complaining. Sports are about breaks and overcoming when the other team gets them....EVERY SINGLE close NBA game, more than any other sport, lends itself to referee second-guessing, because there's so many calls that can go either way.

I still wonder what you think what would make up a fair FT discrepancy after seeing how the game went down. 3-1? I think the Lakers are lucky it wasn't 6-1.

I just looked at the box score again, and the arguments about the foul discrepancy are a bit misleading. Yes, the Celtics took more free throws (38-10), but the actual foul calls were alot closer (28-21).

Not a conspiracy theorist. The refs have their bad days, too, and are human. Trends show refs tend to err on the side of the home team, and the more aggressive team. Doesn't make it right, though.

And I am beginning to wonder what you think would make up an unfair FT discrepancy. 8-1? 10-1?

That's actually a pretty significant discrepancy, too. Not like four-to-one, but still significant. And the difference between the FTs and foul numbers says a lot about the types of fouls called, too, which is another way the game can be influenced without transparency (although once again, I state that as an argument for a poor job by the refs, not as part of some larger conspiracy).

Typical New England fan respone.

(this post was tongue in cheek to some degree, its just nice to be able to make denigrating generalizations about another fanbase instead of have them made about mine)

Yes, I even kept the typo.

I finally saw the highlights of all this.

Wow.

What theatrical drama queen Pierce is. It was absolutely embarassing. To get carried off the court in tears, put in a wheelchair and then come jogging back onto the court? Sweet jeebus.

C'mon, this again, really? This is really the Anti-Pierce, he always pops back up after going down. I don't get how people can't understand he was legitimately worried he wouldn't be able to play against his childhood team in his first NBA Finals.

I don't watch a whole lot of NBA, but I watched last night and I love Jeff Van Gundy! Three awesome comments:

1) Stating what we all know but the NBA would never admit: that if the refs called traveling by the book it would be called on nearly every play.

2) Telling Mark Jackson that he made the most embarrassing statement ever uttered on ABC television. I'm surprised Van Gundy survived the next TV timeout.

3) Immediately following a plug for some new reality show called "Wipeout", Van Gundy dryly intoned: "so many reality shows; so little time".

And after someone brought up the Game 1 Paul Pierce injury conspiracy (that he faked going down), "That's ridiculous. No athlete is that smart".

Hahahaha, why the hell do people think each team should get an equal number of free throw shots?? As if Phil Jackson actually said that! Is that really why you lost? Because Powe had a lot of free throws? Maybe it's because you fouled more? What bs.

It's like complaining about a strikeout ratio in baseball. I mean, how can it be fair that one team got 17 Ks, and the other team only got 4? How is that fair???

I don't get why the Lakers fans are complaining either. Everyone knew the Celtics would win the first two. The Lakers will win the next 3 at home, the Celtics will win game 6, and then game 7 will be the one that matters.

fozzie points out that it's extremely unlikely that the lakers will win all 3 at home. it rarely happens.

Would Chief Rum go on the record now and say that if the Lakers get a foul-call disparity of greater than 28-21 in LA that it's a tainted victory?

So you really think that Boston, being the aggressive team that they are on both offense and defense, really were fouled at that much greater of a clip then the Lakers? You don't believe that Boston got thebenefit of more calls then the Lakers?

There wasn't that much of a difference in foul calls. There was a difference in shooting fouls. The Celtics fouled before the shot, that's all. And once they had a comfortable lead, why would they foul much at all? In fact didn't that lack of aggressiveness lead to the Lakers nearly coming back?

Of course, I don't watch a whole lot of basketball (college or pro) thanks to the officiating and the fouling and the entire way the game is called, so I wouldn't listen much to what I have to say on the matter. Any sport that ignores large sections of its rulebook (travelling, palming) and let's a guy jump into another guy and have it be a foul on guy #2 just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Fair enough. I just can't imagine when a team with Kobe on it would go to the line less as a team, then Leon Powe and not think that maybe the C's were getting a lot of breaks from the refs.

That's the other part of the thinking that bugs me: stars deserve more "respect" from the officials.

OK, I only watched the last 3 minutes of the 3rd quarter and the entire 4th quarter, so please bear with me on this question.

Did the Lakers go to the basket as much as the Celtics did? The Lakers made their comeback by shooting from outside. There wasn't any contact during that time for the refs to call. I acknowledge that something might have happened in the first 33 minutes of the game that I didn't see, but the Lakers didn't deserve many free throws during their comeback, as they operated a mile from the basket. I saw maybe two or three instances of possible fouls that were not called against Boston in the 4th quarter, but I saw the same thing going the other way, too.

So where's the beef? Did the Lakers supposedly get robbed of FT attempts early in the game, or was it late in the second half? If it was early in the game, I didn't see it. If it was late in the game, I guess I just don't understand how to critique an NBA game these days.

this kind of thinking drives me nuts too. a foul is a foul is a foul - regardless of who it is on. or at least it should be. otherwise its just bs

The Lakers were horrible on defense today. The Celtics weren't even running good plays, they were just winging it the entire game, what with all the crosscourt passes and the drive and dish. The Lakers were just a complete mess on defense.

The non-calls by the refs, I can somewhat stomach, despite not liking them. There was a sequence that completely pissed me off where Fisher's arm was all but completely ripped off when a greenshirt pulled at his bicep, and the ref didn't blow the whistle. Still, that is not where the Lakers lost this one.

Defense wins championships, and if the Lakers don't start playing good defense, they are going to lose the series.

I don't think Kobe goes to the line as often as you think.

For the season, he averaged 9 foul shots a game (he had 7 in game 2). But again, the issue is what happened IN THE GAME, not history, not whether there's a discrepency. The Jazz fouled Kobe a lot. The Spurs barely did at all (11 total FTs in that 5 game series).

Why do people want consistency with these numbers game to game, and from team to team within the game? I don't get it. Should umpires hand out an equal number of walks?

Consistency with numbers? Not at all. Consistency with calls? Kobe's second foul was a joke and if the refs called that play, we'd have no players on the court by the start of the second quarter.

What happened in the game was that there was a discrepancy on what fouls were called.

i've seen that foul called on celtics players before - in the detroit series

That should have been a non-call, but it's not an uncommon one - you have to be careful swinging your elbows around the head of a defending player.

So there's one. Do you think you could name 10 others that someone couldn't roughly counter going the other way?

NBA basketball is the hardest game to officiate. A team has to understand that and take it into account. If the refs are calling a tighter game, charge the hoop. If they're putting the whistle away, hack like crazy. If you start to pout and feel bad for yourself after a call doesn't go your way - you're going to lose (see Paul Pierce's career prior to this year).

This is all equiavlent to those fans in football who bring up some holding penalty that wasn't called in the second quarter after a close game. There's SO many opportunities for calls in an NBA game. I'd guess that there's probably at least 20-25 wrong calls in any game, probably more. It's a built-in excuse for ANY loser. Unless you think the game is rigged, they will balance each other out.

That has nothing to do with the game yesterday. I'm not even saying that the refs have a bias against Celtics overall. I had no problem with game 1 as I thought it was done well enough, how were the fouls called in that game?

Why can't the NBA just use the same officials for the entire series? That way each game would be called consistently throughout the series. Or does that make too much sense?

More fouls called on the Lakers by a 29-22 margin. The same +7 margin as game 2.

I think it's all about Powe and the announcers pointing out how often he was going to the line. That riled everybody up for some reason, even Phil Jackson.

If FT disparity shows some kind of referee bias/unfairnes, than the Lakers aren't even a legitimate participant in the finals. Check out the disparity in their four wins in Jazz series:

game1: 46-30 (Lakers)
game 2: 43-16 (Lakers)
game 5:42-28 (Lakers)
game 6: 38-25 (Lakers)

Exactly. Lakers fans have nothing to bitch about. The reason they aren't going to the line is they ar enot driving the ball. The reason they aren't driving the ball is the Celtics D isn't allowing them to drive it.

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