#2 - Pistons@Knicks - 7:30pm ET

[kierkegaard]

What does this even mean? Anyone else guarding Brunson would’ve fouled out by halftime.

Refs got in their heads with the “REFS YOU SUCK” chants and took it out on Ausar. Played some of the best full court defense you can play outside of Lou Dort, but not crafty enough for you???

I don't know. On the play where he convinced J.B. to (unsuccessfully) challenge, Ausar was clearly holding Brunson as Brunson tried to run past him. Neither the play itself nor pleading for the challenge seemed very smart to me.

But that's not even what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about more generally is that if Brunson is baiting and the refs are cooperating, you change things up so as to not take the bait. It's pretty simple and I didn't see Ausar do that Tuesday. I don't see how this is even a question.

You watched that challenge play and thought it was a legit foul? The main story line from this game is Brunson's egregious flopping, so much so that he is more focused on drawing fouls than getting his own team involved.

Go back and watch those 6 "fouls" and tell me that they were all warranted. You'll be lucky to find 4 real ones. Questioning Ausars defense is just moronic, and this isn't homer-ism. He is plenty crafty.

Yes of course that was a foul. Defense is all about body position, beating the offensive player to the spot he's trying to get to. The reason is that the defensive player has a right to that spot just as much as the offensive player. But you have to give the offensive player a step ... and you can't reach out and hold him in the process of trying beat him to the spot. Break either of those rules and it's a foul. Defense is about body position, not arm position. It's not football.

When I played, if someone reached out like that I would intentionally dribble into their arm. Easy foul every time.

In today's game people reach on defense much more than when I played. But if in the process of reaching they make contact and are impeding the offensive player's progress, it's a foul.

[kierkegaard]

What does this even mean? Anyone else guarding Brunson would’ve fouled out by halftime.

Refs got in their heads with the “REFS YOU SUCK” chants and took it out on Ausar. Played some of the best full court defense you can play outside of Lou Dort, but not crafty enough for you???

I don't know. On the play where he convinced J.B. to (unsuccessfully) challenge, Ausar was clearly holding Brunson as Brunson tried to run past him. Neither the play itself nor pleading for the challenge seemed very smart to me.

But that's not even what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about more generally is that if Brunson is baiting and the refs are cooperating, you change things up so as to not take the bait. It's pretty simple and I didn't see Ausar do that Tuesday. I don't see how this is even a question.

You watched that challenge play and thought it was a legit foul? The main story line from this game is Brunson's egregious flopping, so much so that he is more focused on drawing fouls than getting his own team involved.

Go back and watch those 6 "fouls" and tell me that they were all warranted. You'll be lucky to find 4 real ones. Questioning Ausars defense is just moronic, and this isn't homer-ism. He is plenty crafty.

But I should say that I completely agree with about the main story line. In game 2 Brunson was so focused on drawing fouls that it probably detracted from getting his own team involved. And that's a major credit to Ausar.

Don't get me wrong. Ausar is a complete dog on defense and it clearly impacted Brunson. But like Beasley said to the ref 5 times after one particular call, "this is playoff basketball." In the playoffs rules tend to be rewritten and players/coaches have to adjust to whatever the flavor of the day is.

Ausar should bait Brunson in return. Brunson is vulnerable on some of those pump fakes where after the fake he jumps into the defender to draw contact.

[Invictus88]

I don't know. On the play where he convinced J.B. to (unsuccessfully) challenge, Ausar was clearly holding Brunson as Brunson tried to run past him. Neither the play itself nor pleading for the challenge seemed very smart to me.

But that's not even what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about more generally is that if Brunson is baiting and the refs are cooperating, you change things up so as to not take the bait. It's pretty simple and I didn't see Ausar do that Tuesday. I don't see how this is even a question.

You watched that challenge play and thought it was a legit foul? The main story line from this game is Brunson's egregious flopping, so much so that he is more focused on drawing fouls than getting his own team involved.

Go back and watch those 6 "fouls" and tell me that they were all warranted. You'll be lucky to find 4 real ones. Questioning Ausars defense is just moronic, and this isn't homer-ism. He is plenty crafty.

But I should say that I completely agree with about the main story line. In game 2 Brunson was so focused on drawing fouls that it probably detracted from getting his own team involved. And that's a major credit to Ausar.

Don't get me wrong. Ausar is a complete dog on defense and it clearly impacted Brunson. But like Beasley said to the ref 5 times after one particular call, "this is playoff basketball." In the playoffs rules tend to be rewritten and players/coaches have to adjust to whatever the flavor of the day is.

Ausar should bait Brunson in return. Brunson is vulnerable on some of those pump fakes where after the fake he jumps into the defender to draw contact.

I'm sorry. 3 of those calls by the refs were just inexcusable. Ausar shouldn't have to do anything. If he were anything but a rookie and did exactly the same thing then those calls aren't made and he's just continuing to live rent free in Brunson's head.

Ausar is already not being baited by Brunson's go to move of slowing down and picking up fouls from defenders chasing to catch up. He shouldn't and really can't avoid if Brunson decides mid drive to sidestep and throw his body into a defender at his side. That's not a basketball play and can't be avoided unless you just want to stand 3 feet away and let him drive for uncontested layups all day.