DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Cavs vs Celtics Game 6

it's not "the way it is", it's your opinion

let's not get opinions and facts mixed up here...

detroit wouldn't run away with the ecf if we were to face them... there is no fact that can actually prove that...

last year wasn't a fluke, the cavs could have easily swept that series as much as won it in 6 games like they did...

if mark wunderlich actually makes the correct call, we win game 2

and we were in position to win game 1

No kidding it's my opinion, I stated that, It is my opinion and one your not going to change especially when you think that the charge call on Pierce last night was correct. Take off your homer glasses, though I don't think it's possible and please don't talk about bad calls made last year when you clearly can't see the bad calls made this year.


Last year was a fluke. Thats a fact in my opinion.

They should've knocked off Detroit 2 years in a row. In the '06 playoffs The Cavs had them knocked off in 6 if you recall or watched the series All they needed was a defensive rebound but couldn't grab it. Seems like the Cavs learned their lesson closing the deal in 6 last year.

You obviously dont watch the games but rather read headlines, nice try guy.

based on what i've seen in boston, that's a charge.

homer glasses? lolz...

don't even go there.

i'm still waiting on why you think last year was a fluke.

based on one game?

laughable, at best.

keep dodging the question, you know you're wrong.

Yeah it's obvious, LOL. Are you still claiming that the charge call on Pierce was correct?

I've been watching this game for a long time and if we move on there is no need to apologize when we get our asses handed to us. Sorry bud, but I can't take someone seriously who doesn't know the difference between a foul and a charge.

way to dodge it once again

you should become a freaking politician

by the way, there were a good handful of "charges" against the cavs in games 1,2, and 5 that were exactly like the one last night

but please, keep dodging my question.

Quote:

---

You obviously dont watch the games but rather read headlines, nice try guy.

---

LOL, Now people are telling me about my television habits.

Nice try guy but unfortunately you don't live in my house so please don't try and speak on what I do or watch for that matter. Sorry you guys don't like my opinion, but it is what it is.

Thanks for your input and actually worded my response that way on purpose. I know it wasn't worded technically correct, so what? Anyone who knows the game knew what I meant but I bet you feel better now giving an explanation that was unneeded. Again thanks.

Like Sydney Deane said to Billy Hoyle..."you don't hear Jimmy, you only listen to Jimmy"

You may see the games on TV, but you dont watch whats going on obviously.

Feel free to tell me more about myself, I enjoy when people think they have a clue about me and speak.

What time am I having dinner tonight? What time will I be going to bed? You surely can answer these questions all knowing one!

Seriously folks get a grip, just because I don't share the same opinion as most of you doesn't mean I know less, but if that's what you want to believe so be it.

It's just that you have yet to provide any reasonable argument to add any validity to your opinion.

Quote:

---

Seriously folks get a grip, just because I don't share the same opinion as most of you doesn't mean I know less, but if that's what you want to believe so be it.

---

It seems to me you're arguing just for the sake of arguing.

I wonder why that is? I bet It's because I WANT to be wrong! I am not going to argue about something I hope I am dead wrong about, and don't understand why people haven't seen that. Instead they want to bash me to make themselves feel good I guess, but what's the point to argue about something that you don't want to happen?

Yes I think last year was a fluke but also hope that the Cav's prove me wrong.

Thats the thing bud, I am not trying to argue. I gave my opinion that's it.

j/c:

I feel compelled to address a couple of the nonsense points that are making the rounds:

---We did get a few calls in this game. No doubt about it. I don't think that was a charge on Pierce and I do think the block should have been a goal tend. LeBron also got a call or two inside that perhaps he didn't deserve. I don't think those calls even things out, but the discrepancy isn't as bad as I thought it would be. I am worried about tomorrow's officiating though.

---The Pistons would not blow out the Cavs and last year was not a fluke. Cleveland matches up well w/most teams in the playoffs for two major reasons:

1. They have length on the inside. There are four guys that can defend and rebound. They give opposing bigs fits. You can see that teams don't get as many opportunities in the paint against the Cavs as they do most teams and you can also see that we are a great offensive rebounding team. It's hard for teams to match two of our big guys, but hell....we take two out and bring in another two who are very similar.

2. We have LeBron and you either go all out to defend him, which leaves spot-up shooters open; gives the bigs the opportunity to either get open down low or establish position for an offensive rebound; and compromises a team's back-side defense.

The above are hard to overcome in a seven game series. I really believe that the Cavs are a real threat to almost every team in the NBA........in a seven game series.

Sunday's game: I think we have a real shot and we are the better team. I just hope we don't get complacent again. I really wish we could stay mentally tough for longer stretches. Put it this way...........their best against our best equals a Cavs win. I know LeBron said that he won't play w/a sense of desperation, but I do wish he/they would play w/a sense of urgency. Not doing so is our biggest negative.

Hopefully, the guys will come out focused and refs won't be too bad. I do think we have a great shot of winning this game. I actually feel we should win this game!

Even san antonio....?

I hope your right and that I am wrong, but hey I respect the fact you didn't call me someone who just watches ESPN highlights. I want to be wrong with my opinion and dead wrong. Tomorrow will tell us what this team is made of and trust me I will be rooting for them to win probably harder then anyone in the area of Ohio I live.

If Lebron just starts taking outside shots instead of attacking the hole, we are screwed, and if we get past Boston and beat Detroit I will be more then happy to say I was wrong, but as of today, I can't say that.

j/c....

I disagree with almost everyone on the Paul Pierce foul. I think it was the right call. It was a player control fould. Pierce was clearly not in control when contact was made. (But, it should have been goaltending on West lol).

Article 2, Section C of the NBA rules.

c. The dribbler must be in control of his body at all times. If illegal contact occurs, the responsibility is on the dribbler.

NBA Rules

Honestly, I think the Pierce foul could have gone either way. But that is what you get with the refs we have in the NBA today. Let's not forget the BS blocking foul that Big Ben picked up in the 4th as well. Also, One of LeBron's charges was CLEARLY a blocking foul.

And for the Delonte West "block", there was NO WAY that ball was going in, it hit the SIDE of the backboard and started going the other direction before West even touched it. Also, I don't even think Wally fouled Ray Allen on that play, but he did get the call.

I could be wrong, but I don't think it even matters that it wasn't going in - which it wasn't - but I don't think you are allowed to touch the ball after it bounces off the backboard on a shot attempt.

I found this regarding goaltending from :

Link



Section I-A Player Shall Not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch the ball when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
c. For goaltending to occur, the ball, in the judgment of the official, must have a chance to score.
d. During a field goal attempt, touch a ball after it has touched any part of the backboard above ring level, whether the ball is considered on its upward or downward flight.
e. During a field goal attempt, touch a ball after it has touched the backboard below the ring level and while the ball is on its upward flight.
f. Trap the ball against the face of the backboard. (To be a trapped ball, three elements must exist simultaneously. The hand, the ball and the backboard must all occur at the same time. A batted ball against the backboard is not a trapped ball.)
g. Touch any live ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to touch the basket ring. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.
h. Touch the ball at any time with a hand which is through the basket ring.
i. Vibrate the rim or backboard so as to cause the ball to make an unnatural bounce.
PENALTY: If the violation is at the opponent's basket, the offended team is awarded two points, if the attempt is from the two point zone and three points if it is from the three point zone. The crediting of the score and subsequent procedure is the same as if the awarded score has resulted from the ball having gone through the basket, except that the official shall hand the ball to a player of the team entitled to the throw-in. If the violation is at a team's own basket, no points can be scored and the ball is awarded to the offended team at the free throw line extended on either sideline. If there is a violation by both teams, play shall be resumed by a jump ball between any two opponents at the center circle.


These are the parts of the goaltending rule that have a part in this issue. Based on this, I think the call could go either way - lol.


c. For goaltending to occur, the ball, in the judgment of the official, must have a chance to score.

d. During a field goal attempt, touch a ball after it has touched any part of the backboard above ring level, whether the ball is considered on its upward or downward flight.

e. During a field goal attempt, touch a ball after it has touched the backboard below the ring level and while the ball is on its upward flight.

I think subsection (c) is obviously the most important item there. "The ball must have a chance to score". It is physically impossible for a ball that has hit off the side of the backboard to go through the goal.

Yeah, but if you went by D or E, it's a goal tend.

I'm not sure which way the call should have gone, but I think they got it - for lack of a better word - right. Just pointing out that according to the goaltending rules - the call could go either way.

But they're not mutually exclusive. You don't just look at the rule and say "well, I think we'll apply section (e) this time". The rule is saying, basically, that "if any of these situations occur, it is a goaltending violation, BUT ONLY IF, in the judgment of the official, the ball had a chance to go through the goal."

Section (c) is like a catch-all. Why its listed in the middle instead of either at the outset or at the end of the list is beyond me. It's poorly structured, but its not hard to discern the clear intent of the rule anyways.

That's exactly my point.

You can't ignore D because D is just as much a part of the rule as C, and both apply to the situation.