Charge or Block? Kevin Durant on Shane Battier

[Chronz]

Wait why is Battier allowed to shuffle his feet when taking a charge

[Doctor MJ]

Don't shoot the messenger yo. Maybe next time, oKKKc bandwagoner.

Way to sum up your inability to have an objective discussion. I don't have any connection to OKC at all. I've been a Battier fan for a long time. You assume I'm biased only makes clear that your bias is extreme.

[Mobat]

Wait why is Battier allowed to shuffle his feet when taking a charge

Because he was there in time. You can moonwalk all you want when you're in front of an offensive player, you just can't move into them. Battier was there, he can shuffle all the damn well he wants because he had established his position.

[Mobat]

Don't shoot the messenger yo. Maybe next time, oKKKc bandwagoner.

Way to sum up your inability to have an objective discussion. I don't have any connection to OKC at all. I've been a Battier fan for a long time. You assume I'm biased only makes clear that your bias is extreme.

Sorry, thought you had to be an oKKKc bandwagoner because no way anyone would think that's a block otherwise.

[Doctor MJ]

I do not think picking up the dribble means that rules should regulate giving a wide open path to the basket. It seems to me cutting off someones movement is one of the most basic essentials of defense. As it currently is it already favors the offensive player because the defender only is allowed to be in a space if it is substantially ahead of the offensive player. To me if a defender bumps into an offensive player by getting there at the same time or very slightly before it should not reward someone in FTs.

Also there is no way to say they are rejecting playing actual defense by cutting off a lane. This causes the offensive player to make adjustments or miss a lot of shots. Seems like actual defense to me, and as it is there are rule limitations on other defensive options without being called for fouls.

The defender is supposed to be challenging shots, not pretending he's a defenseless puppy. We have charging rules in place because we don't want offensive players acting like running backs, but when Battier gets hit here he's not an innocent hit by a bulldozer, he's choosing to pretend to be a statue (and failing) instead of giving us actual on ball play. Why would anyone want to encourage this behavior?

[Mobat]

I do not think picking up the dribble means that rules should regulate giving a wide open path to the basket. It seems to me cutting off someones movement is one of the most basic essentials of defense. As it currently is it already favors the offensive player because the defender only is allowed to be in a space if it is substantially ahead of the offensive player. To me if a defender bumps into an offensive player by getting there at the same time or very slightly before it should not reward someone in FTs.

Also there is no way to say they are rejecting playing actual defense by cutting off a lane. This causes the offensive player to make adjustments or miss a lot of shots. Seems like actual defense to me, and as it is there are rule limitations on other defensive options without being called for fouls.

The defender is supposed to be challenging shots, not pretending he's a defenseless puppy. We have charging rules in place because we don't want offensive players acting like running backs, but when Battier gets hit here he's not an innocent hit by a bulldozer, he's choosing to pretend to be a statue (and failing) instead of giving us actual on ball play. Why would anyone want to encourage this behavior?

Because it's defense to force offensive players to make decisions they might not want to. In every sport.

[J~Rush]

Charge

[Chri2Kng]

I do not think picking up the dribble means that rules should regulate giving a wide open path to the basket. It seems to me cutting off someones movement is one of the most basic essentials of defense. As it currently is it already favors the offensive player because the defender only is allowed to be in a space if it is substantially ahead of the offensive player. To me if a defender bumps into an offensive player by getting there at the same time or very slightly before it should not reward someone in FTs.

Also there is no way to say they are rejecting playing actual defense by cutting off a lane. This causes the offensive player to make adjustments or miss a lot of shots. Seems like actual defense to me, and as it is there are rule limitations on other defensive options without being called for fouls.

The defender is supposed to be challenging shots, not pretending he's a defenseless puppy. We have charging rules in place because we don't want offensive players acting like running backs, but when Battier gets hit here he's not an innocent hit by a bulldozer, he's choosing to pretend to be a statue (and failing) instead of giving us actual on ball play. Why would anyone want to encourage this behavior?

Why do people care about Battier so much? My only guess is that he play for the Heat. What about all the times Harden flop from the LA to the SA to now? Why is no one talking about Harden flopping yet is mad over one play from a non-flopping defense old school minded player? Shane Battier is one of the nicest guy in the league.

That was a charge plain and simple.

[qm22]

Yeah. Charge. Battier was there just as Durant picked up his dribble.

How can you watch that video and not see that Battier isn't anywhere near set at that point? If you're being honest here, then I really question your ability to watch basketball.

As I said before, I see Battier make 5 small steps and leans in between the time Durant picks up his dribble and the collision. Battier even takes 2 of those steps (and the lean) AFTER Durant takes flight.

If you pause the video at the 0:19 mark Durant is coming down on the step before jumping while Battier is in his "final" position. Durant has the option of pulling up, taking another step in another direction, but he jumped straight into Battier.

Battier did move his body after the 0:19 mark but it is irrelevant to his position. He is basically on the same coordinates in the court and picked up a foot without changing his position when he put it down again, if anything the place where he puts his foot down just makes his stance more narrow. He did not gain an advantage, and was not slipping under Durant as his previous footing was essentially equivalent. According to the rules quoted earlier in the thread you do not have to be completely stationary to be considered "set".

[Chronz]

Wait why is Battier allowed to shuffle his feet when taking a charge

Because he was there in time. You can moonwalk all you want when you're in front of an offensive player, you just can't move into them. Battier was there, he can shuffle all the damn well he wants because he had established his position.

I always though thats only when your the primary defender stepping in front of a ballhandler but when your providing the help you have to be stationary to draw the charge.

[mopper8]

Simply put: Once a driving player picks up his dribble he's absolutely committed. It makes no sense to say that after that point he should be able to stop because a defender became set before the driver left the ground. Yet, refs often see to review based not even on those too-lenient defensive standards but whether the defensive player has managed to stop moving before contact is made.

Suffice to say, this review is not even close in my book. Battier takes not one, not two, not four, but FIVE steps after Durant picks up the dribble and THEN leans into Durant. No one should think Durant did something wrong here.

Of course Battier only does this because it often works, because refs basically don't focus on the defender until the offensive player gets close to him (because they are human, and this is very difficult). Really the only way to get something like this right is to use replay.

I absolutely disagree with this. First of all, its just incorrect that a player is committed the moment he picks up a dribble. There's a even a move -- the euro-step -- that is predicated on the fact that guys aren't committed, and take advantage of that by changing direction after picking up the dribble. What's more, even if you're committed in one direction, you don't have to jump forward; if you see someone close your lane, you can try to jump straight forward.

But the main problem is that players cover way too much ground after picking up the dribble for this to ever work. Look at that Durant dunk on Battier again - he picks up his dribble 17 feet from the basket, takes two long strides, and dunks it. You're telling me you think if a defender hasn't cut off the lane when Durant is 20 feet from the basket, KD should basically have a free lane to the rim for a little floater? It's ridiculous.

The charge and zone rules complement the hand-check rules. If you make it easier to get by the first line of defense, you need to make the second line of defense more of a challenge. If you want to essentially eliminate charges by requiring the defensive player to be in position before the offensive player even picks up his dribble, then you need to reinstate hand-checking to make it harder for the offensive player to get by his man.

As for the rule itself:

On a drive to the basket, the defender must get to his position before the shooter starts his upward shooting motion.

This very definition presupposes that a defender can get into position after a guy picks up his dribble, because obviously the upward shooting motion starts later (often much later) than the gather.

For most other cases, the defender must get into position and allow enough distance for the offensive player to stop and/or change direction.

Again, as per the beginning of my post, a player who is not going full-throttle, out-of-control straight forward can change direction after picking up his dribble, and players regularly do. Your proposed interpretation is WAY too offensive friendly.

[qm22]

I do not think picking up the dribble means that rules should regulate giving a wide open path to the basket. It seems to me cutting off someones movement is one of the most basic essentials of defense. As it currently is it already favors the offensive player because the defender only is allowed to be in a space if it is substantially ahead of the offensive player. To me if a defender bumps into an offensive player by getting there at the same time or very slightly before it should not reward someone in FTs.

Also there is no way to say they are rejecting playing actual defense by cutting off a lane. This causes the offensive player to make adjustments or miss a lot of shots. Seems like actual defense to me, and as it is there are rule limitations on other defensive options without being called for fouls.

The defender is supposed to be challenging shots, not pretending he's a defenseless puppy. We have charging rules in place because we don't want offensive players acting like running backs, but when Battier gets hit here he's not an innocent hit by a bulldozer, he's choosing to pretend to be a statue (and failing) instead of giving us actual on ball play. Why would anyone want to encourage this behavior?

If Battier was allowed to challenge the spot without forfeiting his right to position and turning his play into a defensive foul I'm sure he would be ecstatic. You describe what seems to be an imaginary option and blame the defender for using their only legal one. The defender has to be waiting in position before the offensive player and cannot make many movements without fouling.

The defender "pretending to be a statue" should make it easier for the offensive player, I do not see any excuse making the offensive player being a victim here.

[teerfour+40LG]

Battier gets into a legal defensive position, meaning that he's in front of KD before KD jumps (upward motion).

[Mobat]

Wait why is Battier allowed to shuffle his feet when taking a charge

Because he was there in time. You can moonwalk all you want when you're in front of an offensive player, you just can't move into them. Battier was there, he can shuffle all the damn well he wants because he had established his position.

I always though thats only when your the primary defender stepping in front of a ballhandler but when your providing the help you have to be stationary to draw the charge.

I think he becomes the "primary" defender the moment he establishes himself in front of the player he's defending. In my knowledge, I don't think there's anything about "primary" and "secondary" defenders in the rule book, at least not in any of the rule sets I referee. NBA might have some different wording/interpretations though.

[JDRochholz]

Who cares? your team won......