Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fisher has come through with clutch shots, I've already said that. But he's not someone who takes a team on his back and wills them to victory. He's a role player in the vein of a Robert Horry, clutch when it counts but not someone who can carry a team. I believe that performance to be an atypical one. Certainly Ray was 'HOT' that game, but we're talking a guy who's likely to be the all-time 3pt shooter when he's done. He's had several games with 6, 7, 8 3pointers. Hell, he's got the record for most 3's in a HALF with 8( shared with Tracey Mcgrady). So was I surprised when he went off like that? This is a guy that has been known to get incredibly hot and go on huge distance shooting sprees in the past. And considering the 'defense' played on him that game, not especially surprising. You said it right, Allen was being Allen.
Maybe not, but he's a leader of the team and he has stepped up on several occasions and done what the team needed at critical points in big games. Whether it be making 2 or 3 big 3-point shots in a game or in this case, scoring 11 points in a quarter. I guess I've seen him have enough big games to where I'm not extremely surprised by it. But I can see how the casual observer would be. Most think of him as an average player out there, but he's had some really big moments - many of which aren't shown in highlights because they weren't last minute 3 pointers. Again, I don't think it was that surprising simply because of the type of shots he was being given (outside of that ridiculous layup where 3 Celtics were tackling him).
But I'll give you what you're looking for... as a casual observer, I would be a little more surprised by what Fisher did than what Allen did. By the media accounts, both were pretty surprising. Was it an aberration? No more than Davis' performance for the Celtics. Seemingly everyone on the Celtics has stepped up in critical moments and those situations aren't seen as miraculous. I'm not sure I see why this would be.
I like Van Gundy's idea of no foul-outs, and giving the opposing team 2 shots and the ball when any player reaches 6 fouls. There's no telling what direction this series could have gone if the main stars weren't in such foul trouble over the first 3 games. I think the refs have 'too' much of an impact on the games.
I kind of like that idea too. It would be extremely interesting to see how it would play out. I don't know about 2 shots and the ball, but I liked his idea about simply adding an extra foul shot on to any foul after the 6th - so basically, if a player with 6 or more fouls commits another foul, it would result in 3 free throws instead of just two, or a potential 4-point play if the basket is made instead of a 3-point play - or a 5-point play if it's a 3-pointer.
Maybe not, but he's a leader of the team and he has stepped up on several occasions and done what the team needed at critical points in big games. Whether it be making 2 or 3 big 3-point shots in a game or in this case, scoring 11 points in a quarter. I guess I've seen him have enough big games to where I'm not extremely surprised by it. But I can see how the casual observer would be. Most think of him as an average player out there, but he's had some really big moments - many of which aren't shown in highlights because they weren't last minute 3 pointers. Again, I don't think it was that surprising simply because of the type of shots he was being given (outside of that ridiculous layup where 3 Celtics were tackling him).
But I'll give you what you're looking for... as a casual observer, I would be a little more surprised by what Fisher did than what Allen did. By the media accounts, both were pretty surprising. Was it an aberration? No more than Davis' performance for the Celtics. Seemingly everyone on the Celtics has stepped up in critical moments and those situations aren't seen as miraculous. I'm not sure I see why this would be.
I've seen plenty of Derek Fisher's career, since his rookie year. I'm a bit more than a casual observer. At this stage of his career, I consider that performance very surprising, looking at the bigger context: he's shooting 37% and averaging 9 points in the finals. What he did in Game 3 is one of the more unlikely things to occur right now. And frankly, the Lakers are in trouble if you have to depend on Derek Fisher to bail you out like that. Anyways, I don't think the point needs to be belaboured any further.
And indeed, for the same reasons, one would be more surprised at Glen Davis having that kind of impact, than if that player had been Garnett. Having said that, Glen Davis has been coming up big throughout the finals, and the playoffs overall for that matter. He's a nice spark coming off that bench.
I've seen plenty of Derek Fisher's career, since his rookie year. I'm a bit more than a casual observer. At this stage of his career, I consider that performance very surprising, looking at the bigger context: he's shooting 37% and averaging 9 points in the finals. What he did in Game 3 is one of the more unlikely things to occur right now. And frankly, the Lakers are in trouble if you have to depend on Derek Fisher to bail you out like that. Anyways, I don't think the point needs to be belaboured any further.
And indeed, for the same reasons, one would be more surprised at Glen Davis having that kind of impact, than if that player had been Garnett. Having said that, Glen Davis has been coming up big throughout the finals, and the playoffs overall for that matter. He's a nice spark coming off that bench.
Put Rondo, arguably the premiere point guard in the league, on the Lakers and nobody beats them. Penetrate and kick to Bynum...Pao...or Kobe...or Lamar...or finish himself when the opposition doesn't collapse.
No knock on the Fish. He's been solid but nowhere near a pure point guard.
Don't unestimate the strategy skills of phil jackson or the heart of a champion.
Yes, the Celtics do not have hearts of a champion. I really enjoy how you are picking and choosing which stats and history you are using to justify your position. I dont like either team at all but the Celtics are just better...and thats all which matters.
Put Rondo, arguably the premiere point guard in the league, on the Lakers and nobody beats them. Penetrate and kick to Bynum...Pao...or Kobe...or Lamar...or finish himself when the opposition doesn't collapse.
No knock on the Fish. He's been solid but nowhere near a pure point guard.
True, but show me a Phil Jackson-run team that had a true pure point guard like Rondo. The Lakers don't run a system that requires one, but they do need a shooter at that position. And though Fisher isn't a pure shooter, he's usually there when they need him to be. I think they'll need to bring in a better shooter in the off season though, whether it be a starter or off the bench.
I think the refs have had bad calls on both sides, but honestly, I also think Boston just fouls more. They are more physical and a lot of what they do could be called more often. Just showing the free throw disparity doesn't mean the Lakers are being given gifts. It could also mean they are getting whacked quite a bit more. There have been plenty of fouls that were not fouls on both sides, but plenty more that have not been called. There is a lot of pushing and shoving being allowed now after everyone was up in arms over the first 3 games. And this shift in reffing benefits the Celtics style of play - few will dispute that.
I can point out several bad calls that came at critical times late in games that I believe "might" have changed the outcomes. Most of the blatant ones I saw went against the Lakers. Not because the refs want the Celtics to win or because Stern wants a 7 game series, but because they just missed the calls. In Game 2, they even looked at a replay that showed KG slapping the ball out of bounds and gave the possession to Boston (WTF?) - and earlier in that game they called Kobe for an offensive foul against Allen that was clearly not a foul (if it were, they would have called the same thing against Allen when he did it to Fisher in game 5). The next game (3) they blew a call when Rondo fouled Odom and the ball went out of bounds - they still had to give the ball to Boston because they missed the foul call.. luckily that didn't change the outcome. In the last game, Allen's shot clearly did not hit the rim, but the refs stopped a Lakers run after they did everything they were supposed to do on defense. Not to say that the team that has won each came didn't deserve to win, but the refs ARE having an impact on some of these games and they shouldn't be.
Yes, I'd like it if they let them play. But if letting them play means letting them get away with fouls, then that's a different story.
Oh I'm definitely not saying the refs have been perfect by any means. They're never going to be. The Celtics are a much more physical team and they deserve to have more fouls called on them than the Lakers. I just get frustrated by the constant complaining and notion that this is all fixed. Some of these people seem to believe that David Stern is sitting behind a giant desk in a cavernous office, drinking scotch and laughing a sinister laugh, calling the referees on the phone and saying "FOUL OUT KOBE MUUAAHAHAHAHAHA".
Ray Allen, who rarely gets into foul trouble didn't get to play most of game 1. Kevin Garnett was invisible for the first two games because he was in foul trouble the entire time. It's just part of the game. Don't tell the Laker fans that though. When they win it's because they're supposed to win...but if they lose it's because there's a huge conspiracy with the officials. Paul Pierce flops, Wallace complains (which is the most ridiculous argument ever because he gets called for more fouls than anyone on either team), etc.
The Celtics won game 2 because the refs called 5 fouls on Kobe. It had nothing to do with the fact that Ray Allen went insane in the first half and Rondo went insane in the second. Nope. It was the refs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RazorRob305
We'll see how they call it in L.A. then. I bet they will look at the replay if the ball doesn't hit the rim if that happens in L.A.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot more touch fouls. The West plays a much less physical game than the East, so I'm half-expecting KG to be on the bench the entire first half due to fouls. We'll see if they let them play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dub D
Yes, the Celtics do not have hearts of a champion. I really enjoy how you are picking and choosing which stats and history you are using to justify your position. I dont like either team at all but the Celtics are just better...and thats all which matters.
And frankly, the Lakers are in trouble if you have to depend on Derek Fisher to bail you out like that.
And yet, if it weren't for Glen Davis in game 4, the series could easily be tilted the other way - you might say the Celtics were lucky Davis bailed them out. I'm just not sitting here saying that the Celtics are in trouble if they're depending on Davis to bail them out - we both know there are X factors in every series. Both teams need everyone to contribute and will end up having 3-4 players to have major impacts throughout the series. Allen did it in game 2. Fisher did it in game 3. Davis did it in game 4. It's not always the players you'd expect.
I always think there's a turning point, or a dramatic play in a game that helps decide the series. If the Lakers don't come back to win the series, I'd say that play is either Tony Allen's block on Gasol (foul or not), or Rondo's put back against Odom/Bryant. If the Lakers come back to win, it might be Fisher's layup where he was getting tackled - though I think they need another big play like that before it's all said and done, if only to change the momentum. Last year it was Fisher's 3-pointer against Nelson. The year before that it was Ray Allen's layup against Vujacic to seal the comeback in game 4. It's like that one play that sums up the series.
The problem is they have few trade-able assets, unless they're able to land a decent shooter via free agency.
True. But they have 3 guards hitting free agency after this season. I don't think they re-sign all 3. I think they bring one back and sign a free agent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
