Clippers - Utah Game Thread.

[MHSL82]

But I also remember in the 2003 playoffs, there was a lot of contact, yet Jason Kidd still made the final shot.

New Jersey Nets at Detroit Pistons Play-By-Play, May 18, 2003 | Basketball-Reference.com

And in the 2005 playoffs, Carlisle, who was now coaching Indiana, said "the refs did not decide the game. Lindsey Hunter is a great defender, but he decided the game by fouling Reggie Miller."

Detroit Pistons at Indiana Pacers Play-By-Play, May 13, 2005 | Basketball-Reference.com

That was an instance in which a coach supported a foul call at the end of a game. Yes it was for his player, but he flipped the cliche of "refs don't want to decide a game" back. Miller didn't get the call, and Indiana won without it, but I remember Carlisle saying that he should have gotten a call. If I had the sound bites, it would be even more interesting.

And here's a clip where Miller shoved Jordan, didn't get called for a foul, and made the shot anyways.

I don't have any real point, I'm just bringing up past questionable instances at the end of the game, where the call went either way.

(Ok, I just realized I didn't bring up any where someone DID get the foul call, but you know I could pull those up if I wanted to. I don't want to look those up right now.)

Thanks for the examples. I haven't watched the Hunter video yet. But that was one blatant foul in the Miller example.

 

[nuraman00]

Just listen to me, I have all the angles in my head and I felt the push on my side when he did it. Seriously though, he pushed off, but didn't need to. It didn't help him make the shot per se - I have seen too many contested clutch shots to doubt that he would. But he made the mistake of pushing off and should have paid for it. Then he can have his narrative of winning with his back against the wall the following game. We get to say we pushed him to seven. Even.

The announcers were all over the Eisley and Harper calls until the last few minutes of the game. Then, the push-off winner pushed the talk onto that.

I also don't like how you're so dismissive of the Jazz chances in a game 7. Don't make me pull up all of the games afterward of game 7's. If this were near the playoffs, I probably would pull out the list, but I don't want to look all of that up again right now.

Don't make me pull up all of the other memorable game 7's in sports either. Like the Cardinals beating the Mets in game 7 in the 2006 NLDS, on the road.

Plus, while in earlier rounds, it's more likely that a road team wins game 7's, in the NBA Finals, I think it's less likely, so that would be one advantage for the Jazz.

Although I don't like placing that much of an emphasis on homecourt, especially in the latter rounds, because I feel road teams are supposed to win a few, and consequently, home teams are supposed to lose a few.

Game 3 was probably more damaging, anyways. 54 points, really?

Utah Jazz at Chicago Bulls Box Score, June 7, 1998 | Basketball-Reference.com

The Hornets once shot 24.4% in a playoffs game, and this was NOT the game they lost by 58 points at home in 2009 to Denver. But the Hornets weren't a Finals contender like the Jazz. The Jazz weren't just Finals contenders, they were IN the Finals.

New Orleans Hornets at Miami Heat Box Score, April 21, 2004 | Basketball-Reference.com

 

[nuraman00]

I have seen too many contested clutch shots to doubt that he would.

Yes, but Jordan also missed some too. You just don't remember them like I would.

I can recall at least two different games in with Steve Nash, for example, missed two FTs at the end of games (0/2 on the same trip).

I can call Bryant missing FTs too in at least 3 different games. I'm not going to pull them up right now, but similarly for Jordan, there were misses too.

 

[nuraman00]

I also wouldn't take any more comfort in losing to the Bulls in 7 vs. 6. Because Chicago was in control for most of the series. They won 3 games in a row, and had a 3-1 lead.

If it had been a 2-2 series, then it would have felt closer, but 3-1, especially in the Finals were those types of comebacks are harder (than the earlier rounds), it just took some steam out of the series.

If only the Jazz had gone up 2-0. Then even if they would have lost in 6, it still would have felt like a closer series, to me.

Similarly, I wish the Jazz had at least gotten a split of one of the 1st two games.

I know, some may say this is in vain, that losing in 6 regardless of how the series got there is still a loss. But it matters to me.

 

[MHSL82]

I also don't like how you're so dismissive of the Jazz chances in a game 7.

I also wouldn't take any more comfort in losing to the Bulls in 7 vs. 6...

I know, some may say this is in vain, that losing in 6 regardless of how the series got there is still a loss. But it matters to me.

It's a coping mechanism. If we could have won that game it'd make me go crazy over the push-off. Sad thing is I'm only half-way joking.

 

[nuraman00]

It's a coping mechanism. If we could have won that game it'd make me go crazy over the push-off. Sad thing is I'm only half-way joking.

Why would you be more angry if the Jazz won game 6 and forced a game 7, as opposed to losing game 6?

Is it because you'd feel the NBA is rigged and trying to keep the Jazz down, and the Jazz had to overcome that?

 

[MHSL82]

Why would you be more angry if the Jazz won game 6 and forced a game 7, as opposed to losing game 6?

Is it because you'd feel the NBA is rigged and trying to keep the Jazz down, and the Jazz had to overcome that?

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather win Game 6 than lose Game 6. I was just saying that the claim we would have lost anyway makes me feel that even if we had won Game 6, we'd still be ringless. So, missed pushoff = one loss, not = missed one ring. I already consider us to have won Game 6, so accepting the push-off does not kill my rationalization of Game 6's outcome. It just doesn't reward Utah with a ring they did not earn.

P.S. I don't go around telling everyone this. Just here on this public board. I have already accepted that Jordan is one of if not the best. I wish we had won, which still wouldn't have changed that, but given Stockton and Malone something. But, it's sports. You can't have wins without losses. The Jazz are winning it all in 2032 in memory of 32 Malone. Should have been this year for Stockton.

 

[nuraman00]

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather win Game 6 than lose Game 6. I was just saying that the claim we would have lost anyway makes me feel that even if we had won Game 6, we'd still be ringless. So, missed pushoff = one loss, not = missed one ring. I already consider us to have won Game 6, so accepting the push-off does not kill my rationalization of Game 6's outcome. It just doesn't reward Utah with a ring they did not earn.

P.S. I don't go around telling everyone this. Just here on this public board. I have already accepted that Jordan is one of if not the best. I wish we had won, which still wouldn't have changed that, but given Stockton and Malone something. But, it's sports. You can't have wins without losses. The Jazz are winning it all in 2032 in memory of 32 Malone. Should have been this year for Stockton.

Great post.

P.S. I look at it as "you don't know what can happen in game 7's", which is why I get excited for them.

Of course, they disappoint me sometimes. The back-to-back game 7s during the 2005 playoffs were some of the worst I've seen. It was a Saturday evening. First Indiana beats Boston on the road by 27 points, then Houston loses to Dallas by 40 points. I think there was another year where they had 2 game 7's on the same day, or two on consecutive days, and both were duds also. But the disappointment of the 2005 1st round pair is the one that hurts the most.