Ramon Sessions v. Pacers (Game Thread 4-4-2008)

Andrew34r · Post #161 » by **Andrew34r** » Sat Apr 5, 2008 3:35 am

Mine is just as faulty but I thought it was one either way so who knows. Maybe someone can clarify. :dontknow:

Andrew34r · Post #162 » by **Andrew34r** » Sat Apr 5, 2008 3:39 am

Epicurus wrote:What a boring game by two boring teams. Sessions did bring some excitement. He has got a bit of the whirling dervish to him. I would say that Bogut now has leapfrogged Foster finally. The extra weight helps much in that matchup. And whine about Redd all you want, folks, the guy can get off shots that connect--great trigger.

Foster will always be under-appreciated because he does things in the game that dont show up in the box score. Bogut is probably better but I think any team would be lucky to have Foster.

Foster for Gadz and a second round pick??? It works on trade checker.

paul · Post #163 » by **paul** » Sat Apr 5, 2008 3:46 am

Epicurus wrote:What a boring game by two boring teams. Sessions did bring some excitement. He has got a bit of the whirling dervish to him. I would say that Bogut now has leapfrogged Foster finally. The extra weight helps much in that matchup. And whine about Redd all you want, folks, the guy can get off shots that connect--great trigger.

Agree with that Epi. The bucks have the ability to play exciting ball against an exciting team, but put them against a boring team like the Pacers and this sort of game is always a chance of happening. Thank god for Sessions.

dunhill · Post #164 » by **dunhill** » Sat Apr 5, 2008 3:50 am

Andrew34r wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Foster will always be under-appreciated because he does things in the game that dont show up in the box score. Bogut is probably better but I think any team would be lucky to have Foster.

Foster for Gadz and a second round pick??? It works on trade checker.

I'd love that trade but the pacers wouldn't bite. He is far more accomplished than Gadzuric, he is coming of contract a lot earlier and no way if I were GM of the pacers do I eat Gadzurics contract for a 2nd round pick.

I'm thinking personally that a contender desperate for big man help will be the most likely partner in a 3 way.

fam3381 · Post #165 » by **fam3381** » Sat Apr 5, 2008 4:07 am

Epicurus wrote:doubtlessly true, as the refs certainly know the rule; but I could swear from the deep recesses of my mind when this rare event happened sometime in the distant past, it meant 2 for the fouled non shooter, even when the shot went in. Myabe just faulty memory at work.

I assume it would be the same as when, as a shot has gone up, the refs call a defender for some sort of rough play on a different offensive player down low. If the shot goes in it's one shot to the fouled player even though it wasn't against the shooter and it wouldn't be a shooting foul if it didn't go in.

I think the simultaneity of the act made it a legit call in the rulebook, but I've never seen a play like that. Seemed like a non-call would have made more sense, though perhaps the refs also thought Ivey did something more untoward (he didn't). It was also somewhat unique in that Dunleavy was about to finish by the time Diener was actually hitting Ivey. Usually the latter happens more clearly before the former.