The Official 2006 NBA Playoffs Thread

[Hewson]

no... the play that wade took never should have happened because he jumped from one side of the half court line, caught the ball in mid air, and landed on the other side.

back court violation. should have been dallas' ball.

LemonMacPhisto is right, after a timeout and advancing the ball, you can now inbounds into the back court (I would assume you would be well aware of this), in fact it was a very heady play by Wade to get off his feet off the floor and catch the ball and land in the back court, thus avoiding the violation cause had he had a foot on the court in the front court when possessing the ball it would then have been a violation.

Quite a game.
Credit Nowitzki for stepping up with some big shots late after a tough shooting night, and Wade should be finals MVP even if the Mavs win games 6 and 7.

 

[U2@NYC]

Teams that play with the Hack-a-Shaq should not win the title.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

LemonMacPhisto is right, after a timeout and advancing the ball, you can now inbounds into the back court (I would assume you would be well aware of this), in fact it was a very heady play by Wade to get off his feet off the floor and catch the ball and land in the back court, thus avoiding the violation cause had he had a foot on the court in the front court when possessing the ball it would then have been a violation.
B]

welcome to basketball 101 with professor headache

you're wrong, lemon's wrong, and the refs were wrong. it wasn't a very heady play. it's a back court violation. here is why.

yes, in the nba you can now go into the back court to get the ball on an inbounds, which is the same rule as in high school and college. that is not the issue.

what is the issue is that when a player is in the air, location of possession is determined by where your feet last touched the ground. so much in the same way where a player can't jump from out of bounds and catch the ball in mid air, he cannot jump from the front court, catch the ball, and land in the backcourt. wade's feet need to touch the ground in the backcourt before he catches the ball. if he catches it in mid air, posession is established as being in the front court... where his feet were last on the ground. if all three points... meaning both feet and the ball... return to the court in the back court, which they did, it is a back court violation.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

basketball 101 yes, posting 101 no

double post, my bad

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Teams that play with the Hack-a-Shaq should not win the title.

well, to be fair pat riley did it to ben wallace. he started the whole "team has the lead but do the hack a shaq anyway" thing. so now he's paying for it.

but i agree that it's getting out of hand. i wouldn't mind if the nba put in a rule that gave the ref the right to call an intentional foul throughout the game if someone purposely fouls someone away from the ball.

 

[U2@NYC]

well, to be fair pat riley did it to ben wallace. he started the whole "team has the lead but do the hack a shaq anyway" thing. so now he's paying for it.

but i agree that it's getting out of hand. i wouldn't mind if the nba put in a rule that gave the ref the right to call an intentional foul throughout the game if someone purposely fouls someone away from the ball.

What is the difference between an intentional and a flagrant foul? There seems to be a difference in the ruling but I do not know why... after all, the hack-a-Shaq only happens with the purpose of fouling the guy...

As such, I would agree with a rule that gives Shaq two free throws and possession.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i don't know how the NBA defines it but the NCAA and high school define the difference sort of like this... an intentional foul is a play in foul in which there is no play on the ball, a flagrant foul is an intentional foul that puts the "foulee" at risk of bodily harm.

example... guy's on a fast break and a player behind him wraps his arms around his waist, not making a play on the ball but keeping the player from falling to the ground, not trying to injure, etc. etc.... intentional foul. same situation, player a pushes player b to the ground rather than wrapping him up, flagrant foul.

in college or high school (or in the nba under 2 minutes) what devin harris did to shaq would be considered an intentional foul. what jerry stackhouse did to shaq would still be considered a flagrant foul.



and while we're on rule symantics... i cracked open the 2005-06 NBA rule book and searched down the exact rule re: a player who is in the air.

Rule 8, Section 1 - ...For location of a player in the air, his position is that from which he last touched the floor.

so... thus then... as per Rule 8, Section III, e./exception (blah blah blah)... the ball may be passed into the back court in the final two minutes or overtime. however, location of the player is established by where his feet last touched the ground. so once wade catches the ball, posession is established as being in the front court, which would make when he comes down in the back court a... ta da... back court violation.

 

[Hewson]

what is the issue is that when a player is in the air, location of possession is determined by where your feet last touched the ground. so much in the same way where a player can't jump from out of bounds and catch the ball in mid air, he cannot jump from the front court, catch the ball, and land in the backcourt. wade's feet need to touch the ground in the backcourt before he catches the ball. if he catches it in mid air, posession is established as being in the front court... where his feet were last on the ground. if all three points... meaning both feet and the ball... return to the court in the back court, which they did, it is a back court violation.

Is it not different for a ball being brought in from out of bounds?
The ball is not yet in play until possessed by a player on the floor, which in this case is an airborne Wade who lands in the back court.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Is it not different for a ball being brought in from out of bounds?
The ball is not yet in play until possessed by a player on the floor, which in this case is an airborne Wade who lands in the back court.

see my last post location of an airborne player is established by where his feet left the floor.

needless to say, i'm used to looking up rules in these crappy little books. tis in my job description.

 

[Hewson]

I saw the post, but the ball has not yet been established in possession on the floor in this case, so I wonder if its a different scenario. Cause nobody argued it, and I haven't heard anyone (aside from you) in the media mention it.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

you're just looking in the wrong places...

After Nowitzki's jumper with 9.1 seconds to go gave the Mavericks 100-99 lead, Wade took an inbounds pass wove and dribbled his way seemingly all over South Florida — the Mavericks thought he pushed off and committed a backcourt violation — before he fouled on a drive to the basket by Nowitzki.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060619/ap_on_sp_bk_ga_su/bkn_nba_finals_63

Cuban was standing against a wall, shaking his head while gathering his thoughts before speaking to reporters when assistant coach Larry Riley alerted him to the missed backcourt violation.

"You can't be established in the frontcourt, then jump into the backcourt," Cuban said after watching a replay. "My understanding from the rule book is, if you are going to catch the ball in the backcourt, you have to be in the backcourt to catch it. You can't be established into the backcourt after you catch it or that's a backcourt violation."

http://www.nbc5i.com/sports/9390336/detail.html?rss=dfw&psp=news


and as for the other question... trust me, location of an airborne player is established as where his feet last touched the floor. so when he touches the ball, he starts possession. just like the clock starts the second someone touches it, not the second someone touches the floor. once it's in his hands, possession begins.

that's the rule at every level of basketball, and that is the rule as explained in the NBA rule book, which, admittedly, is sometimes hard to understand.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

as for the actuall foul call it's self... well... it all depends on which way you want to look at it...

foul...

or no foul...

this is exactly why pictures can be deceiving... the first looks like an obvious foul, the second looks like no foul at all. reality is it was a touch call that probably would have been called in the first quarter but usually wouldn't be called in a game deciding play in overtime. it was a foul, but at that point in the game you would hope the ref would swallow the whistle.

that said, wade still had to hit the foul shots... which he did.

 

[Hewson]

you're just looking in the wrong places...

Tis the story of my life.



So OOTS can gripe about the refs robbing his Mavs last night, so long as he changes his gripe from the "Phantom phoul" to the non backcourt call.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

ironicly enough the same ref who missed the back court call was also the ref who charged dallas with the time out in between free throws.

wooooo... spooky. get oliver stone on the horn

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i will say this... dirk is going to get himself fined heavily. the way the nba has gone so far this post-season, i'd be surprised but not shocked if he even earned himself a suspension for kicking the ball into the upper deck.

but as long as that doesn't happen, angry dirk is usually one hell of a player.

 

[LMP]

I think they'll just fine Dirk, not suspend him. It would be bad for business if one team's superstar is suspended from the possible series-clincher because he kicked a ball into the stands.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

frankly dirk deserves a suspension for his actions after the game a hell of a lot more than jerry stackhouse deserved a suspension for his flagrant foul on shaq.

 

[The OOTS]

It should be interesting to see how much Cuban will be fined for his actions. Not only did he yell and scream at officials complaining about the officiating, he was wearing a Stackhouse jersey. That's a semi blatant effU to the commish (who was in attendance) and the decision for suspending Stackhouse.

About the phantom phoul, it may have been a foul and it may not have. I agree with Headache that at that time in the game, and if the call is not super obvious, the whistle has to be swallowed. From the replays, it looked as though the Mavs played D very well.

The drama has been built. Not only do we have an extended series, we have a pissed off Mavs team who lost 3 in a row in bad ways and look to be on the ropes. The NBA could not have written a better script for these next 1-2 games.

 

[Hewson]

Cuban Fined $100,000,000 and Nowitzki Suspended for Games 6 and 7

AP-Dallas
Mavericks owner Mark Cuban was levied the heftiest fine in professional sports history today when NBA Commissioner David Stern fined the boisterous Dallas owner 100 million dollars for "questioning my good judgement and defying all laws of good fashion" by wearing a Jerry Stackhouse game jersey while sitting courtside at game 5 of the NBA finals. Cuban has not decided yet whether to appeal the fine.
Also from camp Dallas, hot headed superstar Dirk Nowitzki was suspended for tomorrow's game 6 as well as a possible 7th game for kicking the basketball into the upper deck of American Airlines arena after last night's loss, hitting a Miami youth in the face. The youth, Saul Rabinowitz has questioned the German native's true motivation for targeting him with the kicked ball.
Stern decided the league had no choice but to keep Nowitzki off of the floor for the balance of the series. At press time, rumors of a Nowitzki tryout as punter for Bill Parcells' Dallas Cowboys were starting to swirl around central Texas.

 

[The OOTS]

^

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

for about 10 seconds i believed you

 

[Hewson]

Those were the best 10 seconds of your life (followed closely by the 10 seconds with that girl under the boardwalk at Coney Island, you know, when she let you....













...have a bite of her hot dog.)

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i guess it appears that david stern rigged the refs in the mavs-spurs finals only so that he could then rig the refs against the mavs in the finals, making cuban all the more pissed off.

that david stern... he is an evil genius. like darth vader, or the claw from inspector gadget.

 

[The OOTS]

there is something about him....don't you think?

 

[impy13]

I'm sick from that game.

I couldn't sleep at all last night, and I've received "are you still alive" text messages from 8 different people.

I still think the Mavs are gonna do it though. I've still got the faith.

 

[impy13]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qDdzU8Dxj4&search=backcourt

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i enjoyed the guy on you tube who posted every single rule except for the one that tells how you establish position for a player in the air.

some nice gentleman set him straight.

 

[namkcuR]

A backcourt violation followed by four steps without the ball, otherwise known as travling. Why isn't this shit called? Why, if we can see this shit sitting at home, can't the ref standing five feet away from these guys see it?

 

[impy13]

I just wanted to bring to attention this prophetic passage from Bill Simmons' article in which he made his Finals predictions:

And that's the thing that bothers me about this series: No team depends on the refs quite like the Heat. When the refs are calling all the bumps on Shaq and protecting Wade on every drive, they're unstoppable. When they're calling everything fairly, they're eminently beatable. If they're not getting any calls, they're just about hopeless. I could see the refs swinging two games in Miami's favor during this series, possibly three. In fact, I'm already depressed about it and the series hasn't even started yet.

Smart man.

 

[Hewson]

followed by four steps without the ball, otherwise known as travling.

Since when is moving without the ball travelling?