RealGM

I'm surprised we didn't have a separate thread for this, though is may have been discussed in one of the general threads.

This pissed me off like I can't explain.

Will Pacers’ Paul George be suspended for Game 7 after leaving bench? [UPDATE: No]
http://nba.si.com/2014/05/02/paul-george-indiana-pacers-bench-suspension-game-7-george-hill-mike-scott/

Why? This is why:

NBA suspends Stoudemire, Diaw for leaving bench
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/news/story?id=2871615

Here's the best part:

But NBA executive vice president of basketball operations Stu Jackson told reporters in a conference call after announcing the suspensions that the league's longstanding policy of invoking its leave-the-bench rule without considering additional factors made the Suns' suspensions automatic.

"A precedent wasn't necessary here," Jackson said. "The rule with respect to leaving the bench area during an altercation is very clear.

"Historically, if you break it, you will get suspended, regardless of what the circumstances are."

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I have to tell you. It's beyond obvious to me that the league plays favorites and creates stars. I get it, too, from a business standpoint. But as a long-time Suns fan, it really does feel that the Suns will forever be on the losing side in these battles. Small market, no "heritage", etc.

/end rant.

But this is blatant hypocrisy.

/end rant again.

Spurs were a ratings killer back then and the Suns were a huge draw. There was no conspiracy just stupid rules.

Silver made the right call but unfortunately the past regime weren't high on common sense.

Yeah, my blood boils even thinking about that whole Amare/Diaw thing.

I guess looking at it objectively though, we are dealing with a different machine now. New commissioner and more importantly, Stu Jackson is out. It was his awful judgment that resulted in the Amare/Diaw suspensions.

As pissed as I was (am) about how we got the shaft there, I guess this is kind of a case for the NBA of, just because the last guys screwed this up, should we keep screwing it up forever?

Speaking to this specific incident, I don't believe Paul George deserved a suspension. He barely left the bench and didn't get involved at all. I could see the merit in suspending Rasual Butler, because he did go farther out - but he also didn't participate, so it seems fair not to suspend him either. And also, Butler doesn't need a suspension to rack up a DNP I did read a good point in another article which I now cannot locate, what about the Hawks players? They appeared to be more off the bench than either of those guys.

Listen - I agree. No sense in perpetuating a bad rule. It was stupid then and it's stupid now.

That being said - it is still a rule and one that ANY team in the league is aware of, much less a playoff team. Given that it's a rule that EVERYONE is aware of, why do people still step onto the court?

At the time, that wasn't a rule that had been enforced in any significant form or fashion - the Suns got nailed by it.

Now, after the rule has been enforced in form and function - the Pacers get the benefit of the doubt.

DirtyDez wrote:Spurs were a ratings killer back then and the Suns were a huge draw.

Not calling conspiracy on the whole, that being said you and I may remember things very differently. And I'm not just talking about the Spurs/Suns series, either. Stern HATED the Suns, it was obvious.

I thought the suspensions were moronic. First Stat, at that point shied away from contact for what seemed to be an avoidance to get injured again, and I don't think even if he made it to where guys were, he was going to do anything. Diaw, wasn't going to escalate anything, and he calmly walked the whole time, and he should have never received a suspension.

Honestly, it was the moronic comments by Amare after the game, and even into the press conference about being on his way to check into the game. That caused multiple questions to both Bell and D'Antoni, and both had to shrug their shoulders at Amare's claims. Had Amare not made up that lie, had he gone directly to Steve to see if he was ok, and had he not jumped up and down like a giddy little school girl, I don't know if any suspensions would have been handed out.

However, Diaw should never had been suspended.

Sun Scorched wrote:

DirtyDez wrote:Spurs were a ratings killer back then and the Suns were a huge draw.

Not calling conspiracy on the whole, that being said you and I may remember things very differently. And I'm not just talking about the Spurs/Suns series, either. Stern HATED the Suns, it was obvious.

It wasn't obvious to me that Stern hated the Suns. It was obvious that the rule was stupid. The NBA loved the Suns during that period of time.

DirtyDez wrote:

Sun Scorched wrote:

DirtyDez wrote:Spurs were a ratings killer back then and the Suns were a huge draw.

Not calling conspiracy on the whole, that being said you and I may remember things very differently. And I'm not just talking about the Spurs/Suns series, either. Stern HATED the Suns, it was obvious.

It wasn't obvious to me that Stern hated the Suns. It was obvious that the rule was stupid. The NBA loved the Suns during that period of time.

We weren't loved, we often had to overcome poor officiating by shooting well. I think the league figured out that we were entertaining, but it didn't matter if we won or lost.

The networks loved us = the NBA loved us

Didn't the Suns lead the league in wins over a 6 year span from 04-05' thru 09-10' and hold a top 5 winning% all time? Doesn't sound like hate to me...

DirtyDez wrote:The networks loved us = the NBA loved us

Didn't the Suns lead the league in wins over a 6 year span from 04-05' thru 09-10' and hold a top 5 winning% all time? Doesn't sound like hate to me...

Overcoming regular season games by shooting very well, isn't proof of love. Even after Nash won his second MVP, he still was never treated like one by the league and refs. He was hand checked all over the place, every game.

RunDogGun wrote:

DirtyDez wrote:The networks loved us = the NBA loved us

Didn't the Suns lead the league in wins over a 6 year span from 04-05' thru 09-10' and hold a top 5 winning% all time? Doesn't sound like hate to me...

Overcoming regular season games by shooting very well, isn't proof of love. Even after Nash won his second MVP, he still was never treated like one by the league and refs. He was hand checked all over the place, every game.

You blame everything on officiating and always have. The Suns were a regular season juggernaut and lost to a better team four out of five years in the playoffs during the Nash era with 07' being the possible exception IMO. Not enough evidence to me that Stern and officiatals purposely hated us made sure we lost.

Sometimes we just weren't a better team but it's hard to overlook how little respect Nash got throughout his career. Like RDG mentioned, even after his 2nd MVP title, he still didn't get the kind of respect even a much younger Lebron got.

DirtyDez wrote:

RunDogGun wrote:

DirtyDez wrote:The networks loved us = the NBA loved us

Didn't the Suns lead the league in wins over a 6 year span from 04-05' thru 09-10' and hold a top 5 winning% all time? Doesn't sound like hate to me...

Overcoming regular season games by shooting very well, isn't proof of love. Even after Nash won his second MVP, he still was never treated like one by the league and refs. He was hand checked all over the place, every game.

You blame everything on officiating and always have. The Suns were a regular season juggernaut and lost to a better team four out of five years in the playoffs during the Nash era with 07' being the possible exception IMO. Not enough evidence to me that Stern and officiatals purposely hated us made sure we lost.

I'm not blaming anything on the refs, that they didn't do. We lost games because the other team scored more than us. But our team was not treated like other teams. You disagree, and think we were treated completely equally to other teams like the Spurs. Cool.

lilfishi22 wrote:Sometimes we just weren't a better team but it's hard to overlook how little respect Nash got throughout his career. Like RDG mentioned, even after his 2nd MVP title, he still didn't get the kind of respect even a much younger Lebron got.

Or even Curry his rookie season. I remember Nash stopping on a dime and taking a jump shot from the free throw line, Jason Terry ran him over, and somehow Nash got called for the foul. Some of it was ridiculous.

lilfishi22 wrote:Sometimes we just weren't a better team but it's hard to overlook how little respect Nash got throughout his career. Like RDG mentioned, even after his 2nd MVP title, he still didn't get the kind of respect even a much younger Lebron got.

Completely different game style... And if you really wanna hop on the RDG bandwagon, how much can the NBA market a mid-30's, white point guard.. so why would they treat him like a 6'8 athlttic freak with a super-cool name like LeBRON James which has swag dripping out of it's ears.



Im not saying RDG is wrong, because there really isnt an obvious answer.

Too bad Silver wasn't the NBA commish already back then, that was a great team which missed out a chance to have a fair fight

RunDogGun wrote:

DirtyDez wrote:

RunDogGun wrote:Overcoming regular season games by shooting very well, isn't proof of love. Even after Nash won his second MVP, he still was never treated like one by the league and refs. He was hand checked all over the place, every game.

You blame everything on officiating and always have. The Suns were a regular season juggernaut and lost to a better team four out of five years in the playoffs during the Nash era with 07' being the possible exception IMO. Not enough evidence to me that Stern and officiatals purposely hated us made sure we lost.

I'm not blaming anything on the refs, that they didn't do. We lost games because the other team scored more than us. But our team was not treated like other teams. You disagree, and think we were treated completely equally to other teams like the Spurs. Cool.

I dunno if if the Spurs were treated differently but the Suns were called for more fouls only once vs San Antonio in the previous 4 playoffs matchups and that was 2005.

DRK wrote:

lilfishi22 wrote:Sometimes we just weren't a better team but it's hard to overlook how little respect Nash got throughout his career. Like RDG mentioned, even after his 2nd MVP title, he still didn't get the kind of respect even a much younger Lebron got.

Completely different game style... And if you really wanna hop on the RDG bandwagon, how much can the NBA market a mid-30's, white point guard.. so why would they treat him like a 6'8 athlttic freak with a super-cool name like LeBRON James which has swag dripping out of it's ears.



Im not saying RDG is wrong, because there really isnt an obvious answer.

All I'm saying is we weren't "loved" and there are a handful of teams were/are treated better than us. Still way too often what is a foul on one end, is not a foul on the other. That's why I always love our team. We usually find ways to overcome this with sound shooting.

Looking back, here's what I think about the controversial suspensions.

1. I agree Diaw should not have been suspended.

2. Amare deserved his suspension.

3. Horry should have been given a 3 game suspension instead of 2 games to guarantee he wouldn't play again in that series after that dirty foul he committed.

4. It cost the Suns the series and a title.

DirtyDez wrote:

RunDogGun wrote:

DirtyDez wrote:
You blame everything on officiating and always have. The Suns were a regular season juggernaut and lost to a better team four out of five years in the playoffs during the Nash era with 07' being the possible exception IMO. Not enough evidence to me that Stern and officiatals purposely hated us made sure we lost.

I'm not blaming anything on the refs, that they didn't do. We lost games because the other team scored more than us. But our team was not treated like other teams. You disagree, and think we were treated completely equally to other teams like the Spurs. Cool.

I dunno if if the Spurs were treated differently but the Suns were called for more fouls only once vs San Antonio in the previous 4 playoffs matchups and that was 2005.

I really dislike this theory. The non-calls, and where the calls/non calls happen matter greatly, and don't show up in a box score. Often our pace was killed by bad calls after bad calls. Also, bad calls could mean violations, which don't show up in the box score. Goaltending called and then not called, out of bounds calls. Even now, reviewable calls only happen rarely.

In one of the Spurs series, even Jon Barry mentioned seven or eight really bad calls that screwed the Suns. And Jon was never really a Suns supporter.

Oh well, it will just come down to opinions at this point, and we differ. No problem.

Just for the record, I think GS is allowed to have multiple moving screens every game. Most of them are blatantly obvious, and lead to a three pointer in their favor. If they were called like they should be, Draymond Green would foul out of at least half of the games he played.