The NBA - basketball talk

Game of Zones episode 3. I'll admit, I preferred the previous ones.

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

You know that the gameplan's gone wrong when your team is seriously losing to a team that gave Austin Rivers and an old Hedo Turkeyglue heavy minutes.

edited 4th May '15 9:06:03 PM by NoChorus

Bulls beat Cavs in game 1, stealing home court advantage. The difference between health and lack thereof.

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

Nobody beats Austin Rivers like Austin Rivers.

Though to be honest I must wonder why he was handling the ball with his team down by 4 with 30 seconds to go.

EDIT: Is this the part where I eat my words, or should I save that for if he goes off again

edited 8th May '15 10:22:58 PM by NoChorus

New to this part of the board, hi everyone.

My Bulls got eliminated today and only have themselves to blame for it. Prime opportunity in that offensive drought to inch closer but didn't capitalize. This game summed up their whole season. Briefly showing signs of basketball/offensive brilliance (1st) then kinda giving up (2-4). Really now, it's like only Jimmy Butler wanted to win this game. Rose seemed to get discouraged after being blocked that one time, which he shouldn't. He's a superstar, being paid like one, and really should start playing like one on a consistent basis again. Noah was horrible throughout the season. There's still next season though, which I reamin optimistic for. Still, it might not be Thibs leading this pack next time.... What a wasted opportunity to make a title run. Kevin Love out, Lebron playing bad, Kyrie on one leg. They'll get James one of these seasons.

Clippers managed to clutch defeat at the jaws of victory, I'm appalled.

edited 15th May '15 4:55:14 AM by Jigaboo

I did naht.

Well said, fellow Bulls fan.

Here's hoping we can get the team on the court back for once, and not be too cheap to bring back a winning team again. I wouldn't be surprised, or strongly disappointed, if Thibs was out, though.

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

I was at Wiz-Hawks game 6. That was a heartbreaker. One can complain about the officiating, but it was the right call, and the Wiz didn't do themselves any favors missing all those shots and free throws.

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

Apparently, there are different kinds of fouls in basketball. So far I know that there are "normal" fouls (though maybe the actual name for them is different), "technical" fouls, "intentional" fouls, and "flagrant" fouls. Are there any other kinds? What differentiates them? And can a foul fall under two or more categories simultaneously?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

A foul is any sort of breaching of the rules.

Normal or standard "fouls" are the most likely to occur in a game situation. These are generally taken to mean either accidentally or intentionally obstructing the run of play in some manner, but without the intent to cause a major injury or violation. A player can commit 6 standard fouls before they are immediately ejected.

An intentional foul is a type of foul wherein a player strategically commits a foul. Often, this is to force the opposing team to restart a play or shoot free-throws, causing an opportunity for play to go where the fouling player's team would get the ball afterwards. However, an intentional foul can also be a flagrant foul, such as the "clear path foul", wherein a player on a fast break is accosted by a player behind them, who had no chance of actually stopping the play. Most intentional fouls are desperation type moves, and players usually don't take much offense, unless it was just so unnecessary or offensive to them.

A flagrant foul is one where a player basically abandons all basketball sense and commits a foul in an attempt to cause some more major disruption of play. This can include physically attacking another player. There are two types, the Flagrant 1 and the Flagrant 2. A Flagrant 2 is where the offense is so major that the player is immediately ejected from the game. All flagrant fouls are technical fouls.

A technical foul is the most "technical" of fouls. These include non-injurious rule violations like standing in the low post for 3 or more seconds without guarding anyone in particular (known as "Defensive 3 second violation", it's basically loitering to disrupt play), or more major things like swearing, especially at a referee, excessive arguing with the referree, acting in a way that may lead to a fight, or what have you. If a player amasses 2 technical fouls in a game, it is an immediate ejection from the game. Additionally, once a player commits 16 technical fouls in a season, after the 16th and ever other violation after that (18, 20, 22, etc.), the player is ejected for one game. Note that coaches and team management can also be assessed technical fouls, though this happens more rarely. This basically occurs when they try to make the game "about them", especially by arguing or swearing, or call a time-out when the team is out of time outs, in an attempt to deliberately cheat and stop play.

edited 18th May '15 11:53:46 AM by wanderlustwarrior

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

I thought the limit was five. Or did the NBA change that rule and Japan didn't follow up? ^note Most of my in-depth info on basketball comes from Slam Dunk's and Kuroko no Basuke's quite accurate infodumps on the real-life rules, moreso the former due to being a nigh-completely mundane take on basketball compared to KNB's mildly more fantastic approach. And I sigh "nigh-completely" because ain't no way you could call Hanamichi Sakuragi a completely normal first-year high schooler.

... Wait, time-out. How does the referee distinguish between a non-intentional foul and an intentional one? Is it a "I know it when I see it" thing?

The low post... That's basically the blue-shaded area here, right? Or is it the one marked "restricted area"? I remember this one from Slam Dunk's Shouhoku vs. Ryonan match, where Shouhoku's center was pressured by both worrying about accidentally re-injuring his recently-healed ankle and kept losing his attempts to win his one-on-ones with Ryonan's center within the 3-second time limit (forcing him to pass the ball to a teammate).

edited 18th May '15 5:29:05 PM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Upon the 6th foul being assessed, the player is ejected.

It's generally pretty clear by the situation if a foul is intentional or not. A bump when a player is shooting, when the defender is mostly trying to go for the ball? Not intentional. Carefully wrapping your arms around the ball handler's upper body when you're down by 4 with 30 seconds left in the game? Intentional. Stuff like that. It mostly just becomes a real issue when determining if something is flagrant or not. Intentionality and necessity are big parts of something being ruled a flagrant foul.

The "post", lane, or whatever people want to call it is the entire blue shaded area, and its immediate vicinity. The "low post" is the part nearer the basket, which includes the restricted area. Centers tend to play near here. The "high post" is the part closer to the free throw line. Forwards tend to play nearer here. You're much less likely to see a Defensive 3 call when someone's in the high post, because usually guards and forwards are running in and out of that area.

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

Slam Dunk and Kuroko no Basket are high school basketball. They use amateur rules, hence the five fouls. Professional leagues have six fouls as a limit, although international competition (because they cover a wide range of ages from U16 to U18, U19, U21, and U23 up to the FIBA World Championship and the basketball event in the Olympics) follow five fouls instead (for the sake of uniformity across all competitions).

I'm reading this because it's interesting. I think. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over.

Ah, thanks, I wouldn't have been able to explain that distinction.

Is there anything else I missed?

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

No, that was quite informative. So... Here is a hypothetical scenario that I came up while thinking up ideas for a Kuroko no Basuke-style story, and I would like your feedback on it regarding the rules. All names are merely placeholders.

• On one side, we have Team Arcadia, your typical heroic basketball team: A core of highly talented players bolstered by several average to mediocre players who nevertheless are determined to do the best they can to support the better players.
• On the other side, we have Team Hades. A rotten team whose members are consummate liars and cheaters, with their play style focused on pulling all sorts of foul play (including some flagrant fouls) without the refs ever noticing. Think Kirisaki Daiichi or Toyotama High dialed Up To Eleven.
• In the middle of Teams Arcadia and Hades' match, Hades eventually finds itself losing their lead after Arcadia pulls itself together and avoid falling for Hades' provocations. Ultimately, one of the Hades players (Bruce) snaps from mounting anger and frustration as an Arcadia player is in the process of successfully passing him, and lashes out in a moment of unthinking rage by spinning around to strike the Arcadia player's head with his elbow hard enough to cause a serious bleeding injury that puts him out of commission for the rest of the match.
  • Question 1: This would obviously count as a flagrant foul, but is it possible that the referee would only count it as a Flagrant 1, rather than Flagrant 2?
• Once the game resumes, and assuming that the refree for some reason or the other did not call a Flagrant 2 on the above foul... Team Arcadia's center and captain, Alex, gets the ball, and then drives full-throttle to the basket past all the defending Hades players except one: The very player who had committed the aforementioned offense. By now, Alex, who has foul play and attacking his friends/teammates as his Berserk Button, is very frustrated with the dirty play style of his opponents, which was not helped by the opposing captain openly gloating in his face about it when the ref or any other officials are not in hearing range. And while everyone has been urging him to control his emotions for the sake of the team, this last foul was the final straw. So what does he do? He deliberately ankle-breaks his opponent so that he'll be under the basket, then quickly jumps in for a one-handed dunk... into which he puts enough power that 1) the ball slams straight into the Hades player's skull with enough violent force to seriously injure his head and/or neck, and 2) he actually tears off the hoop from its perch, slamming it on his opponent's head.
  • Question 2: What kind of foul is the referee most likely to call here? That is, is there a good chance that the ref may be torn about whether or not there was intentionality in the act, if Alex already has a reputation for occassionally putting too much strength into his dunks to the point of damaging or even breaking/dislodging the abused hoops?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Yes it is possible because it still depends on the referee. A referee can still rule it a flagrant 1 if for example his standard of flagrant 2 is that the player should have died then and there. "Merely" having serious bleeding would be flagrant 1 for that referee.

LOL the referee can actually call it a blocking foul on the defending player in that situation. What happens after the dunk would be a technical foul if he intentionally pulled out the ring...LOL

I'm reading this because it's interesting. I think. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over.

We're forgetting the obscene amount of time refs take to review calls too.

I did naht.

I thought those only happen if the defender jumps to block the dunk, not if he lost balance and fell back far enough that he's under the basket and didn't have time to recover before the attacker jumped for the dunk.

Assuming, of course, that the referee's eyes are sharp enough to notice that he did so.

Which apparently never happens in Fictionland's basketball games. I mean, you'd think the officials would've caught on by now that matches involving the likes of Kirisaki Daiichi are suspiciously prone to having the opposing teams have their aces seriously injured during the match for no apparent reason.

edited 19th May '15 7:05:16 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

So long as there is contact a foul could be called. It's possible his arms touched the dunker's legs/feet while he was already sitting on the floor...

edited 19th May '15 7:37:48 AM by entropy13

I'm reading this because it's interesting. I think. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over.

I'm rooting for the Dubs from here on out. I don't trust the Hawks to dispatch the Cavs, and I'd like the MVP to go all the way. It's also kinda fun to root for Golden State. When they all start draining those threes, it looks like real fun to be in Oracle.

I did naht.

But what if they don't? What other possible things in that specific situation could result in a defensive foul being called?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Well no foul will be called if there's no contact. A technical foul would possibly not be called on him for holding on the ring too if holding on the ring was to "avoid contact".

edited 19th May '15 8:49:26 AM by entropy13

I'm reading this because it's interesting. I think. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over.

Warriors-Cavaliers NBA Finals.

I'm reading this because it's interesting. I think. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over.

Welp, as much as I hate Harden and took pleasure in watching him turn the ball over (like he's prone to), no matter how you look at it the Warriors are just overall a much more complete team than the Rockets so this isn't really much of a surprise.

What was a surprise was how much Howard got away with. He could kill someone and get a slap on the wrist.

If Steve Kerr wins, he'll be only the 6th person to win multiple championships as a player and win one as a coach. The other people on that list are Phil Jackson and 4 players who played on that Celtics dynasty. He'd also be the only one to win with multiple teams as a player (the Bulls' 2nd 3peat, and 2 nonconsecutive championships with the Spurs). He'd also be the first to do it as a rookie head coach, though he was also a GM and analyst previously. Dude knows the game.

The sad, REAL American dichotomy

And Thibs is out. Hoiberg's in.

I liked the guy but I can see why they fired him. Defense wins you championships, but offense takes you there. I still don't know how to feel about the organizations press release following his release though. In any case, I'm excited to see the Bulls play next season with hopefully more dynamic offensive sets.

I haven't actually seen ISU play, but from what I hear Hoiberg's coaching style resembles that free-flowing offensive style that seems to be the "in" thing in today's game.

Wishing Thibs luck on his future endeavors!

edited 2nd Jun '15 7:20:27 AM by Jigaboo

I did naht.