Celtics just won their 18th Championship*

[jsimon]

I have bitten my tongue since game 7, reading much and looking over stats before I weighed in. I cannot 100% blame the refs in this series. The Celtics played uneven ball during the season and even in the playoffs. They shouldn't have fell so far behind LA in game 3; they should have played much better in game 6 to try to avoid facing a game 7 in LA. I don't care how good a road team you are, that's not a favorable situation.

That said, though, I'm sorry but I do have to say that reffing still was a major reason Boston lost game 7 and the series. In each of the first 3 games, the refs took out a member of the Big 3 for huge chunks of the game. And it those fouls always seemed to take place when one of them was heating up, with the exception of Ray in Game 2. No surprise LA took 2 of those 3 games. As I just mentioned, it's seems like after Pau's terrible 2008 Finals, that Stern ordered the refs to assist him in looking tougher; I guess if he was going to have the guy traded to LA to keep Kobe happy, he had to make sure Pau could make an impact. Pau started getting so many calls his way and started getting away with so much contact while he flailed around trying to look tougher after the '08 finals.

No matter how you slice it, the refs robbed Boston in game 7. Yes, the Celtics' rebounding was abominably bad; however, this was largely negated by the Lakers' abysmal shooting from not only the field but from the charity stripe. Seriously, everyone who harps on the rebounding deficit as the reason the Celtics lost fails to explain then how the Celtics still managed to still take a lead and hold it much of the game until the Laker onslaught of foul shots in the 4th.

Thus we get to the 4th quarter and the Lakers didn't have much of an advantage in FTAs. Also, they were in danger of possibly losing. They weren't making shots; even Kobe wasn't. Only Artest really was hitting his shots. The refs had given a few fouls to minor Laker players like Vujacic to give the appearance that the game was being called evenly. But no more trying to be discreet. Kobe's legacy and the Kobe brand were at stake. What would happen if Kobe choked under pressure and failed to lead his team to victory on his own home court in game 7? So they started to call fouls on everything the Celtics did. Did you see when Garnett actually pulled back from Gasol and had his hands crossed over his chest yet still drew the foul? That was Gasol-instigated minor contact but the foul went on KG, though he actually probably didn't defend effectively because he was trying to avoid drawing the foul. Yet Gasol got his forearm into KG's lower back on a couple of KG's shots under the rim. And let's not even go into Gasol's up-and-down that went uncalled.

The Celts outscored the Lakers 17-12 in the 4th from the floor. This was wiped out by a 16-5 Laker advantage at the line. This in a game where so few points were scored? Those 16 points were nearly a quarter of all points scored by LA. Amazing that could take place in a game 7 of the playoffs, much less the Finals. A 37-17 final advantage in FTAs for the Lakers. That's 44% as many FTAs as FGAs.

No matter how much you spin it, reffing was a huge component of why the Celts lost. And what a coincidence that the worst and most blatant awarding of free throws to the Lakers in the series occurred when they faced elimination and were not able to hit shots from the field. There is a good post by "theman" on this board, too, under the "Biggest Story in the finals is the refereeing" thread that puts a good dent in the "Celtics weren't driving" during this series argument (see viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1018400&start=225, 4th post). Pierce and Allen were driving; KG was going inside. They couldn't draw fouls. Furthermore, even Bill Simmons' rather timid game chat pointed out that the Lakers took 20 three point attempts out of 83 total attempts to the Celtics 16 out of 71, so you can't say that the Lakers weren't taking jump shots.

I really think Stern is a one-trick pony. He lucked out with Magic and Bird and then really lucked out with MJ. He knows no other way to market the league than with a superstar. So with LeBron not keeping up his end of the bargain, Stern has to keep up Brand Kobe. I really think the goal is get Kobe 7 titles so he's "better" than MJ and indisputably GLOAT over Magic. Finally, it's not like this sort of gifting of free throws to the Lakers in the playoffs is unprecedented. Just ask the 2002 Sacramento Kings.

Great, great post and sums up everything I've been saying all day.

[Ad Hominem]

I still have yet to hear one Laker fan explain how their team shot 65 more free throws in a seven game series when they were outscored in the paint by a wide margin all series long. Further, explain how the Lakers, after being unable to mount any kind of a charge for three quarters last night, found themselves at the free throw line more in the 4th quarter than we were all game. Explain how the Lakers shot more free throws in the last quarter of a hard fought game than they shot in the first three quarters combined?

Call us babies all you want, the Lakers were crowned Champions and any self respecting Laker fan should feel a little ashamed deep inside today.

Laker fans explaining anything to you is useless since your cognitive dissonance is impenetrable -- but what the hell, I'll take a shot at it, if for no other reason than the imagined amusement of celt fans like yourself sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling NOT LISTENING NOT LISTENING NOT LISTENING.

Beat by beat then.

First of all, I collected a lot of #s for this post alone, so maybe I missed a number here or there, maybe I hit the wrong button on the calculator, but I don't know where you get your 65 more free throws. I counted 51. Still a big number, yes, so no need to really exaggerate it up to 65 is there?

Someone mentioned the OK series, where thunder shot 55 more FTs than the Lakers, 194-139. In game 3 the thunder shot 48-28. Guess what? LA overcame it. It's what champions do.

In the 2nd round the Lakers shot 11 more FTs than the jazz, 118-107. Coincidence that a sizeable % of the losing fanbase there cried through the whole series about how rigged it was? Funny how it is on real gm. Nobody's team ever loses. They were always robbed.

In the WCF the suns shot 50 more FTs than the Lakers, 190-140. The Lakers only got more FTs in one of the six games, game 2. You'd think that the "we-got-robbed" % of the suns fanbase wouldn't be crying like every other loser, but they were! It was like the only way it would have been fair is if the Lakers got ZERO free-throws. Even one trip to the line was too many, and it meant the refs were paid off by Stern.

And now you. Your team has earned such amazing respect, the toughest finals team that any of Kobe's Laker teams have ever faced. I hate all the celts but I have so very much respect for their teamwork, their toughness, their will -- all of it. They gave everything they had and they will always be remembered for it, especially after the tough road they took to get to the finals. But you -- this % of your fanbase that just cries and cries and cries, it's really god damn ridiculous.

How did the Lakers get to the FT line after 3 quarters? Did you watch the game? Do you remember Kobe taking low % shot after shot from the perimeter and missing repeatedly before finally driving to the hoop in the 4th? Is it really that much of a mystery after many of you quit on your team in March when they were so gassed then they couldn't finish games? Now after the tough run they had to that game 7 it's a mystery to you?

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

And see, that's just it. When you win, it was all on the up and up. When you lose -- ROBBED!

I absolutely applaud the celtic fans who are man enough to say best team won, and take their lumps. Your team was amazing. A strong argument could be made that you'd have pulled it off if you had Perkins. But refs had nothing to do with the difference in rebounds (really, look at those #s), and the refs had nothing to do with Pierce and Allen's shooting %. Fair games are not games in which the # of free-throws is equal or near equal. In game 2, Lakers had 41 free throws and the celtics only had 26, but guess what, celtics won.

Let me repeat that:

GAME 2:
CELTICS FREE THROWS = 26
LAKERS FREE THROWS = 41
CELTICS WON THE GAME

And finally, for every ignorant fan who wants to cry about the 2002 sacramento kings in the WCF, you need to understand the whole story. Cry however you want to about game 6, but after you do make sure you explain about game 7, because here's the truth:

2002 WCF GAME 7, Sacramento, California, Arco Arena
The game went to overtime.
Sacramento shot 16/30 free throws, or 53%. At home. Game 7.
Lakers shot 27/33, and Shaq shot 11/15.

So before you join the NoCal crybaby tears that keep the delta so replenished with water, take a deep breath, and understand that that kings team CHOKED. Just one more free throw in either regulation OR overtime wins them the series (and later the championship). When you have a game 7 at home like that and you choke it away at the free throw line, no one but crybabies care about what happened in game 6. The refs put the kings on the line plenty of times, put the series in their hands, put their own destiny in their hands -- and they freaking CHOKED.

So MAN UP for chrissakes. Your celtic team has been the epitome and definition of toughness. This crybaby % of your fanbase is making a mockery of such an historic team.

YOU LOST. OWN IT.

[loscy]

i didnt read really any of this but man up and accept defeat. We lost and we deserved to lose. Its ok. It happens. This defense mechanism every fan uses to blame the refs is getting increasingly old.

[ConnorHenry]

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

...

2002 WCF GAME 7, Sacramento, California, Arco Arena
The game went to overtime.
Sacramento shot 16/30 free throws, or 53%. At home. Game 7.
Lakers shot 27/33, and Shaq shot 11/15.

So before you join the NoCal crybaby tears that keep the delta so replenished with water, take a deep breath, and understand that that kings team CHOKED. Just one more free throw in either regulation OR overtime wins them the series (and later the championship). When you have a game 7 at home like that and you choke it away at the free throw line, no one but crybabies care about what happened in game 6. The refs put the kings on the line plenty of times, put the series in their hands, put their own destiny in their hands -- and they freaking CHOKED.

So MAN UP for chrissakes. Your celtic team has been the epitome and definition of toughness. This crybaby % of your fanbase is making a mockery of such an historic team.

YOU LOST. OWN IT.

[/quote]

Don't whine about 2010 while you whine about 2008? Throughout 2008, 2009, and this series you guys whined about not having Bynum and Ariza in '08 and a full-strength Bynum for most of this series.

Regarding 2002, there shouldn't have been a 2002 WCF game 7. Convenient to leave out the game 6 stats. LA got 27 -- 27! -- FTAs in the 4th! The Kings 9. Bibby takes an elbow from Kobe and ends up with a bloody nose -- and Bibby was called for the foul! LA got 40 FTAs for the game to Sac's 25. LA won by 4. Hmmm, eerily similar to game 7 2010 ref antics.

Some quotes:

"When that stuff started coming out about (Donaghy), the first thing I heard from people down here was: 'Oh, my goodness. I wonder what they're saying today in Sacramento?' " related Los Angeles Times columnist Bill Plaschke. "Everybody knows the Lakers weren't the best team that series. Die-hard Lakers fans won't admit it publicly, but deep down, they know something was very wrong with that game."

"Game 6 of the Kings-Lakers series was one of the worst officiated games I've ever seen."

From Michael Wilbon:

After noting that the three referees in Game 6 "are three of the best in the game, Wilbon wrote: "I have never seen officiating in a game of consequence as bad as that in Game 6....When Pollard, on his sixth and final foul, didn't as much as touch Shaq. Didn't touch any part of him. You could see it on TV, see it at courtside. It wasn't a foul in any league in the world. And Divac, on his fifth foul, didn't foul Shaq. They weren't subjective or borderline or debatable. And these fouls not only resulted in free throws, they helped disqualify Sacramento's two low-post defenders. And one might add, in a 106-102 Lakers' victory, this officiating took away what would have been a Sacramento series victory in 6 games."

From Ralph Nader:

Nader went on, "Wilbon discounted any conspiracy theories about the NBA-NBC desire for a Game 7 etc., but unless the NBA orders a review of this game's officiating, perceptions and suspicions, however presently absent any evidence, will abound and lead to more distrust and distaste for the games in general."

Nader also cited the basketball writer for USA Today, David Dupree, who said, "I've been covering the NBA for 30 years, and it's the poorest officiating in an important game I've ever seen."

When Wilbon writes that The Kings and Lakers didn't decide this series three referees did.. when many thousands of fans, not just those in Sacramento, felt that merit lost to bad refereeing, you need to take notice beyond the usual and widespread grumbling by fans and columnists about referees ignoring the rule book and giving advantages to home teams and superstars," said Nader.

Then Nader and McCarthy moved in "for the kill," addressing the nearly absolute power that the NBA wields over its players and fans. "Your problem in addressing the pivotal Game 6 situation is that you have too much power," said Nader. "Where else can decision-makers (the referees) escape all responsibility to admit serious and egregious error and have their bosses (you) fine those wronged (the players and coaches) who dare to speak out critically?"

"You and your league have a large and growing credibility problem, Referees are human and make mistakes, but there comes a point that goes beyond any random display of poor performance. That point was reached in Game 6 which took away the Sacramento Kings Western Conference victory."

"It seems that you have a choice. You can continue to exercise your absolute power to do nothing. Or you can initiate a review and if all these observers and fans turn out to be right, issue, together with the referees, an apology to the Sacramento Kings and forthrightly admit decisive incompetence during Game 6, especially in the crucial fourth quarter."

"You should know, however, that absolute power, if you choose the former course of inaction, invites the time when it is challenged and changed whether by more withdrawal of fans or by more formal legal or legislative action. No government in our country can lawfully stifle free speech and fine those who exercise it; the NBA under present circumstances can both stifle and fine players and coaches who speak up. There is no guarantee that this tyrannical status quo will remain stable over time, should you refuse to bend to reason and the reality of what occurred. A review that satisfies the fans' sense of fairness and deters future recurrences would be a salutary contribution to the public trust that the NBA badly needs."

-http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles/BacherNaderNBA.htm

[Ad Hominem]

Don't whine about 2010 while you whine about 2008? Also throughout this series you guys whined about not having Bynum and Ariza in '08 and a full-strength Bynum for most of this series.

Did I whine about 2008, Connor? Care to check your reading comprehension again? I asked how many celt fans having a tantrum said Lakers were robbed in '08 to make the point that when you win it's all good, only when you lose do you cry. 2008 celts were AWESOME. They owned the Lakers and any Laker fan who doesn't fess up to that is just as deluded as the % of your fanbase having a full case of the vapors.

And notice how I try not to generalize? I say a % of the jazz fanbase, a % of the sun fanbase, a % of your fanbase, but you lump all Laker fans into one nice big easy to demonize pile. Every fanbase is the same. Some can take it, and another % can't.

As for whatever donnaghey, nader, blahhhhhhhhhhh snorrrrrrrrrreeee... all that crying is so 2002. You really can't expect anyone to read it with a straight face unless they have a strong interest in crying in your beer with you. MAN. UP.

[ConnorHenry]

Don't whine about 2010 while you whine about 2008? Also throughout this series you guys whined about not having Bynum and Ariza in '08 and a full-strength Bynum for most of this series.

Did I whine about 2008, Connor? Care to check your reading comprehension again? I asked how many celt fans having a tantrum said Lakers were robbed in '08 to make the point that when you win it's all good, only when you lose do you cry. 2008 celts were AWESOME. They owned the Lakers and any Laker fan who doesn't fess up to that is just as deluded as the % of your fanbase having a full case of the vapors.

And notice how I try not to generalize? I say a % of the jazz fanbase, a % of the sun fanbase, a % of your fanbase, but you lump all Laker fans into one nice big easy to demonize pile. Every fanbase is the same. Some can take it, and another % can't.

As for whatever donnaghey, nader, blahhhhhhhhhhh snorrrrrrrrrreeee... all that crying is so 2002. You really can't expect anyone to read it with a straight face unless they have a strong interest in crying in your beer with you. MAN. UP.

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

That's not whining about '08?

As for whatever donnaghey, nader, blahhhhhhhhhhh snorrrrrrrrrreeee... all that crying is so 2002. You really can't expect anyone to read it with a straight face unless they have a strong interest in crying in your beer with you. MAN. UP.

Nice try in totally trying to duck the issue of precedence in Laker victory gift-wrapping by refs. As you say, MAN UP.

[jsimon]

Laker fans explaining anything to you is useless since your cognitive dissonance is impenetrable -- but what the hell, I'll take a shot at it, if for no other reason than the imagined amusement of celt fans like yourself sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling NOT LISTENING NOT LISTENING NOT LISTENING.

Beat by beat then.

First of all, I collected a lot of #s for this post alone, so maybe I missed a number here or there, maybe I hit the wrong button on the calculator, but I don't know where you get your 65 more free throws. I counted 51. Still a big number, yes, so no need to really exaggerate it up to 65 is there?

Someone mentioned the OK series, where thunder shot 55 more FTs than the Lakers, 194-139. In game 3 the thunder shot 48-28. Guess what? LA overcame it. It's what champions do.

In the 2nd round the Lakers shot 11 more FTs than the jazz, 118-107. Coincidence that a sizeable % of the losing fanbase there cried through the whole series about how rigged it was? Funny how it is on real gm. Nobody's team ever loses. They were always robbed.

In the WCF the suns shot 50 more FTs than the Lakers, 190-140. The Lakers only got more FTs in one of the six games, game 2. You'd think that the "we-got-robbed" % of the suns fanbase wouldn't be crying like every other loser, but they were! It was like the only way it would have been fair is if the Lakers got ZERO free-throws. Even one trip to the line was too many, and it meant the refs were paid off by Stern.

And now you. Your team has earned such amazing respect, the toughest finals team that any of Kobe's Laker teams have ever faced. I hate all the celts but I have so very much respect for their teamwork, their toughness, their will -- all of it. They gave everything they had and they will always be remembered for it, especially after the tough road they took to get to the finals. But you -- this % of your fanbase that just cries and cries and cries, it's really god damn ridiculous.

How did the Lakers get to the FT line after 3 quarters? Did you watch the game? Do you remember Kobe taking low % shot after shot from the perimeter and missing repeatedly before finally driving to the hoop in the 4th? Is it really that much of a mystery after many of you quit on your team in March when they were so gassed then they couldn't finish games? Now after the tough run they had to that game 7 it's a mystery to you?

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

And see, that's just it. When you win, it was all on the up and up. When you lose -- ROBBED!

I absolutely applaud the celtic fans who are man enough to say best team won, and take their lumps. Your team was amazing. A strong argument could be made that you'd have pulled it off if you had Perkins. But refs had nothing to do with the difference in rebounds (really, look at those #s), and the refs had nothing to do with Pierce and Allen's shooting %. Fair games are not games in which the # of free-throws is equal or near equal. In game 2, Lakers had 41 free throws and the celtics only had 26, but guess what, celtics won.

Let me repeat that:

GAME 2:
CELTICS FREE THROWS = 26
LAKERS FREE THROWS = 41
CELTICS WON THE GAME

And finally, for every ignorant fan who wants to cry about the 2002 sacramento kings in the WCF, you need to understand the whole story. Cry however you want to about game 6, but after you do make sure you explain about game 7, because here's the truth:

2002 WCF GAME 7, Sacramento, California, Arco Arena
The game went to overtime.
Sacramento shot 16/30 free throws, or 53%. At home. Game 7.
Lakers shot 27/33, and Shaq shot 11/15.

So before you join the NoCal crybaby tears that keep the delta so replenished with water, take a deep breath, and understand that that kings team CHOKED. Just one more free throw in either regulation OR overtime wins them the series (and later the championship). When you have a game 7 at home like that and you choke it away at the free throw line, no one but crybabies care about what happened in game 6. The refs put the kings on the line plenty of times, put the series in their hands, put their own destiny in their hands -- and they freaking CHOKED.

So MAN UP for chrissakes. Your celtic team has been the epitome and definition of toughness. This crybaby % of your fanbase is making a mockery of such an historic team.

YOU LOST. OWN IT.

I'll just say a couple of things and then we'll let it go, because honestly I'm almost 40 years old and these things have a way of fading in importance.

1. My count of 65 is adjusted for intentional foul shots. In games 1 and 6 we were blown out and there were none, but in games 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 there were several. More for the Lakers over the series, especially game 2 where we shot about 8 intentional foul shots.

2. For me at least, this is a first. I have never felt jobbed by the NBA before this series. Bad calls and constant bad officiating, yes, but jobbed... not until now. Maybe it's only because this is the first time it's happened to my team, but never the less, it's still the first time in my life I've personal gone on a rant about this.

3. I see you put a lot of work into your post, but perhaps you are feeling a little touchy about this because you seem to be on the winning end of some very famous "iffy" officiating performances. I know how frustrating that may be as a Lakers fan, but maybe you should put a little of the blame on the NBA, David Stern, and the refs for giving so many people the impression that things aren't on the up and up. If I were a Lakers fan, and this perception (real or not) existed, I would be pissed at the league for letting it fester.

4. It's a little odd how you detail how little the Lakers went to the line in this entire playoffs, then somehow managed to go to the line by leaps and bounds in the Finals over the Celtics.

5. You can throw everything else out in my book, but I still find it hard to believe someone can explain with a straight face how in game seven the Lakers end up at the line 19 times in the 4th quarter, after struggling offensively all game, and only 16 times in the first three quarters. You went to the line more in the 4th than we did all game. In a game where both teams struggled to put points on the board, I don't see how that sudden jolt of "free" scoring opportunities didn't help your cause, some might say unfairly.

[Hilltop]

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

That's not whining about '08?

He wasn't whining about it, he was comparing it to this year's series wherein the Lakers had the differential in their favor. What he means is, why were none of you complaining back then?

As for whatever donnaghey, nader, blahhhhhhhhhhh snorrrrrrrrrreeee... all that crying is so 2002. You really can't expect anyone to read it with a straight face unless they have a strong interest in crying in your beer with you. MAN. UP.

Nice try in totally trying to duck the issue of precedence in Laker victory gift-wrapping by refs. As you say, MAN UP.

I'm curious ConnorHenry, do you think the NBA cheats?

If so, then your title in 2008, and those in the 80s are crap. Not unless of course you believe the cheating only began last night If the NBA is fake, then it's fake. Don't cherry-pick games/serieses that are convenient to you (ie. when you lose).

[jsimon]

I'm curious ConnorHenry, do you think the NBA cheats?

If so, then your title in 2008, and those in the 80s are crap. Not unless of course you believe the cheating only began last night If the NBA is fake, then it's fake. Don't cherry-pick games/serieses that are convenient to you (ie. when you lose).

Personally I think it's been bad for about 5-8 years and it seems to be getting worse every year.

[Ad Hominem]

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

That's not whining about '08?

It's not, Connor. I'm asking how many of you who choose free throw differential as evidence of shenanigans made the same argument when the free throw differential favored you. Look at the context of the rest of my post where I make the point that free throw differential doesn't decide victory, as in game 2.

Perhaps drawing a better mental picture would help. This is whining: boo hoo, celtics really won, david stern stole this from us, media loves lakers, I'm going to make a thread titled celtics just won their 18th championship waaaaaaa!

This is not whining: when you get more free throws why don't you ever make the same argument that you make when you don't get more free throws?

Got the difference?

And for extra clarity, just so you're not confused by ME, and my feelings about 2008. Celtics took the Lakers behind the woodshed and showed them who was boss. Manhandled that championship and there was no denying it by anyone. Best team in the league, and to prove it, gave the biggest arse-whooping in Laker history in that game 6, just in case any idiot tried to question the validity of it. Okay? No whining here about that. 100% legit.

To see the Lakers fight back, toughen up, and grind out last night's game 7 was a beautiful thing. To read the % of your fanbase now trying to take away the validity of that, the % of your fanbase refusing to man up, to post threads about how you guys just got your 18th... it's just really sad because not one single celtic player who played last night is making your arguments right now. The got beat. They're men about it. They're owning it. They're moving on. YOU, Connor, are apparently among the ones who can't take it.

And Nader, really, if you need to put a feather in your cap over me not needing to address that, whatever man. Seriously, go find someone in sactown who cares. As the kids are saying on the interwebs these days, KLOSED.

[ConnorHenry]

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

That's not whining about '08?

He wasn't whining about it, he was comparing it to this year's series wherein the Lakers had the differential in their favor. What he means is, why were none of you complaining back then?

As for whatever donnaghey, nader, blahhhhhhhhhhh snorrrrrrrrrreeee... all that crying is so 2002. You really can't expect anyone to read it with a straight face unless they have a strong interest in crying in your beer with you. MAN. UP.

Nice try in totally trying to duck the issue of precedence in Laker victory gift-wrapping by refs. As you say, MAN UP.

I'm curious ConnorHenry, do you think the NBA cheats?

If so, then your title in 2008, and those in the 80s are crap. Not unless of course you believe the cheating only began last night If the NBA is fake, then it's fake. Don't cherry-pick games/serieses that are convenient to you (ie. when you lose).

Why aren't you Laker fans complaining about the FTAs difference now? What sense would it make when you won? Duh. But FTAs disparity didn't decide game 6, the clincher in '08.

I think the pattern of questionable refereeing started in '98...don't try to mislead with overgeneralizations. Maybe then Stern had an interest in an '08 Celt win. I've certainly seen a ton of Laker fan posts griping about that ever since.

[Hilltop]

I'm curious ConnorHenry, do you think the NBA cheats?

If so, then your title in 2008, and those in the 80s are crap. Not unless of course you believe the cheating only began last night If the NBA is fake, then it's fake. Don't cherry-pick games/serieses that are convenient to you (ie. when you lose).

Personally I think it's been bad for about 5-8 years and it seems to be getting worse every year.

There's a big difference between saying NBA officiating is bad/inconsistent/incompetent and saying that Stern actually manipulates what goes on. I'm not so sure which one your stance is.

[Hilltop]

And really, help me here, in 2008 when the celtics shot 19 more free-throws than the Lakers, 190 - 171, how many of you that are in full-tantrum mode now were making the argument that the Lakers were robbed in 2008? Show of hands? Anyone?

That's not whining about '08?

He wasn't whining about it, he was comparing it to this year's series wherein the Lakers had the differential in their favor. What he means is, why were none of you complaining back then?

As for whatever donnaghey, nader, blahhhhhhhhhhh snorrrrrrrrrreeee... all that crying is so 2002. You really can't expect anyone to read it with a straight face unless they have a strong interest in crying in your beer with you. MAN. UP.

Nice try in totally trying to duck the issue of precedence in Laker victory gift-wrapping by refs. As you say, MAN UP.

I'm curious ConnorHenry, do you think the NBA cheats?

If so, then your title in 2008, and those in the 80s are crap. Not unless of course you believe the cheating only began last night If the NBA is fake, then it's fake. Don't cherry-pick games/serieses that are convenient to you (ie. when you lose).

Why aren't you Laker fans complaining about the FTAs difference now? What sense would it make when you won? Duh. But FTAs disparity didn't decide game 6, the clincher in '08.

I think the pattern of questionable refereeing started in '98...don't try to mislead with overgeneralizations. Maybe then Stern had an interest in an '08 Celt win. I've certainly seen a ton of Laker fan posts griping about that ever since.

What "overgeneralizations" are you talking about? You're basically saying that the NBA is a fraud and Stern "cheats". If we are to believe your accusations, then it is perfectly reasonable to assume that this has been the case the ENTIRE time he has been commissioner.

You can't just cherry-pick the years you think the NBA was legit and the years you think it started going downhill LOL. That would be an assumption based off an assumption, which is just ridiculous. Where's the consistency?

If the NBA is the WWE, then the Celtics since the 80s have been FAKE Champions just like the Lakers, Bulls, etc. Either you take the good with the bad or do everyone else a favor and can it. Don't whine about conspiracies if you can't take the implications.

And no, I'm not a Laker fan.

[jsimon]

There's a big difference between saying NBA officiating is bad/inconsistent/incompetent and saying that Stern actually manipulates what goes on. I'm not so sure which one your stance is.

Neither am I.

I just know that something didn't feel right about this series. Maybe it was because the national media only took notice of the poor officiating after game 2, when Superstar Kobe got 5 fouls, and after the game, a game in which (adjusted for intentionals) you out shot us at the line 39-18, Phil Jackson had the gall to complain about the calls, and Kobe sounded on the podium like a man sure he wouldn't see foul trouble again for the rest of the series. There was something really odd about the confidence in his voice when he said that.

The total free throw disparity didn't help. The refs being baited into bad calls by Gasol and Fisher and Sasha flops. Not saying the Celtics didn't flop some, but let's face it Euros flop a lot, and Fisher has turned it into an art form.

But mostly it was just the 4th quarter 19-6 free throw parade, after three quarters of 16-11 that blew my mind. No one will ever be able to explain that 4th quarter to me.

Is the NBA rigged? I don't know. I'm just a fan and I have no proof. But is it the league where officials most effect the outcome of games, call the most fouls, and inspire the most fan rage, yes... yes it certainly is.

[Ad Hominem]

I see you put a lot of work into your post, but perhaps you are feeling a little touchy about this because you seem to be on the winning end of some very famous "iffy" officiating performances. I know how frustrating that may be as a Lakers fan, but maybe you should put a little of the blame on the NBA, David Stern, and the refs for giving so many people the impression that things aren't on the up and up. If I were a Lakers fan, and this perception (real or not) existed, I would be pissed at the league for letting it fester.

Seriously, don't fool yourself, there is NOTHING frustrating about being a Laker fan. I'm going to a parade Monday morning, what are you doing?

[jsimon]

Seriously, don't fool yourself, there is NOTHING frustrating about being a Laker fan. I'm going to a parade Monday morning, what are you doing?

If you were really so cocksure in your belief that the best team won, then why are you trolling a Celtics message board defending your team's coronation to a cry baby loser Celtics fan like me?

[joneb]

Call me conflicted.

On the one hand, we failed to execute some key plays down the stretch. Far too many turnovers and poor shots with the shot clock running down. The Lakers should be credited for hitting big shots. Both Artest and Fisher came through.

But on the other hand, there were plenty of questionable calls down the stretch. KG got fouled on a drive by Gasol but it wasn't called. Gasol got away with an up-and-down that wasn't called. And Rasheed was called for a couple of fouls he didn't commit.

Bottom line- Celtics could have controlled their own destiny by executing better down the stretch. However, if a few whistles went the other way, it could have played out differently.

Congrats to the Lakers, but consider yourselves fortunate.

[Ronathinyo]

Seriously, don't fool yourself, there is NOTHING frustrating about being a Laker fan. I'm going to a parade Monday morning, what are you doing?

If you were really so cocksure in your belief that the best team won, then why are you trolling a Celtics message board defending your team's coronation to a cry baby loser Celtics fan like me?

why is it that whenever someone is trying to prove points to show someone is wrong, its immediately trolling? trolling would be if he just said, Lakers werent given a fair advantage at all, Celtics just suck.. thats trolling, he actually tried to say something of value.

[Hilltop]

There's a big difference between saying NBA officiating is bad/inconsistent/incompetent and saying that Stern actually manipulates what goes on. I'm not so sure which one your stance is.

Neither am I.

I just know that something didn't feel right about this series. Maybe it was because the national media only took notice of the poor officiating after game 2, when Superstar Kobe got 5 fouls, and after the game, a game in which (adjusted for intentionals) you out shot us at the line 39-18, Phil Jackson had the gall to complain about the calls, and Kobe sounded on the podium like a man sure he wouldn't see foul trouble again for the rest of the series. There was something really odd about the confidence in his voice when he said that.

The total free throw disparity didn't help. The refs being baited into bad calls by Gasol and Fisher and Sasha flops. Not saying the Celtics didn't flop some, but let's face it Euros flop a lot, and Fisher has turned it into an art form.

But mostly it was just the 4th quarter 19-6 free throw parade, after three quarters of 16-11 that blew my mind. No one will ever be able to explain that 4th quarter to me.

Is the NBA rigged? I don't know. I'm just a fan and I have no proof. But is it the league where officials most effect the outcome of games, call the most fouls, and inspire the most fan rage, yes... yes it certainly is.

Well I'm not even arguing about whether or not referees cheat/influence games. That's really a matter of opinion, isn't it?

I'm simply saying that Celtics fans should be more consistent and less narrow-minded. It seems that most here like to complain about the legitimacy of this league when your team loses, but say nothing when you win games. Donaghy's statements ring true when Orlando keeps the series alive, yet he become irrelevant when you won the series (as he predicted you would with the help of the referees). What's up with that?

I don't understand how you can see any Celtic win to be fair and square or your Championships to be meaningful in a league that is bogus. Especially since you guys, like the Lakers, are known favorites of Stern.

[jsimon]

why is it that whenever someone is trying to prove points to show someone is wrong, its immediately trolling? trolling would be if he just said, Lakers werent given a fair advantage at all, Celtics just suck.. thats trolling, he actually tried to say something of value.

We debated in a civil manner for a while, then he pulled out the "I'm going to a parade on Monday, what are you doing" card. Things fell apart from there...