Eastern Conf. Finals

#29
#29
... No it wouldn't.

Not for me, anyways. Lakers v. Pistons would be way more interesting. A young team led by Kobe Bryant, a second potential dynasty in the making against the old dogs of the league, a team that is on its last legs but has gotten it done before. Rocky Balboa-esque, in a sense. But they've been one of the two consistently great teams in the league in recent history.

The Pistons playing for one last hoorah, or a start to another championship run for Jackson and the Lakers. Great stuff.

The Celtics do have *some* interesting story lines going on, but none of recent relevance to the league. The Boston Three Party have all been would-bes up to this point in their careers, and the Celtics franchise has not mattered in a long time. The reason people will find it interesting (aside from the fact that they're both large-market teams -- Detroit and SA are not) is purely for the nostalgia for the old-time greats of the NBA. Pretty much appeals mainly to older generations who have become disenfranchised with the league as of late, which I know there are a lot of on this board. That's all well and good, but that storyline simply doesn't currently matter.
 
#30
#30
milohimself said:
... No it wouldn't.

Not for me, anyways. Lakers v. Pistons would be way more interesting. A young team led by Kobe Bryant, a second potential dynasty in the making against the old dogs of the league, a team that is on its last legs but has gotten it done before. Rocky Balboa-esque, in a sense. But they've been one of the two consistently great teams in the league in recent history.

The Pistons playing for one last hoorah, or a start to another championship run for Jackson and the Lakers. Great stuff.

The Celtics do have *some* interesting story lines going on, but none of recent relevance to the league. The Boston Three Party have all been would-bes up to this point in their careers, and the Celtics franchise has not mattered in a long time. The reason people will find it interesting (aside from the fact that they're both large-market teams -- Detroit and SA are not) is purely for the nostalgia for the old-time greats of the NBA. Pretty much appeals mainly to older generations who have become disenfranchised with the league as of late, which I know there are a lot of on this board. That's all well and good, but that storyline simply doesn't currently matter.
Click to expand...
Thus the term classic in Finey's post.
 
#34
#34
The Dude said:
The officials didn't seem to want to call a foul on Fisher last night.
Click to expand...
apparently. just like they didn't want to call anythingon Detroit when they went into the 1-2-2 zone trap late in the 4th in game 4. Made the game tighter and pleased the home fans to some degree, I'm sure.

The fickle nature of officiating really makes things unpredictable at the NBA and collegiate levels.
 
#35
#35
The lack of consistancy in what is and isn't a foul does get on my nerves, I just disagree with you on how the refs apply their calls to to both teams.
 
#38
#38
There are other aspects of other sports that can be tough to call. Football has them, but holding isn't really one IMO. There's a pretty clear definition of what holding is and when to call it. It's not that it's hard to call, it's more that it just doesn't get called.

But I believe basketball is much, much harder to call than any other sport, because 90% of the fouls are contact-based, pretty much all of which have a lot of gray area, not to mention other factors like ball control, exact timing and flopping.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top