Fair's fair

[exstatic]

We got BACK those few second fractions we lost against Houston.

[Brutalis]

That's one way to look at it.

[DeadlyDynasty]

PUH-LEAZE....horrible, horrible call. The best part about this is the fact that Spurs fans are no longer allowed to bitch about refs, stern, etc. You were just given a game that saved you from playing @ portland in the first round. Dont you EVER bitch about officials again

[Mugen]

PUH-LEAZE....horrible, horrible call. The best part about this is the fact that Spurs fans are no longer allowed to bitch about refs, stern, etc. You were just given a game that saved you from playing @ portland in the first round. Dont you EVER bitch about officials again

0.4, game 6 against the kings, game 4 of 2008 wcf... should i keep going?

[exstatic]

PUH-LEAZE....horrible, horrible call. The best part about this is the fact that Spurs fans are no longer allowed to bitch about refs, stern, etc. You were just given a game that saved you from playing @ portland in the first round. Dont you EVER bitch about officials again

Why should Laker Fan impose a standard they aren't willing to follow?

FUCK YOU, BITCH

[HarlemHeat37]

we weren't saved from playing Portland LOL..Portland is most likely going to be 3rd..

Sacramento still had to make their shot, or it would have went into OT..

[timvp]

Meh. The Kings hit about a dozen BS shots throughout the game.

I'll take it.

[Thomas82]

Meh. The Kings hit about a dozen BS shots throughout the game.

I'll take it.

+1 This win put us, at least temporarily (according to ESPN.com) at the 3 spot.

[GSH]

PUH-LEAZE....horrible, horrible call. The best part about this is the fact that Spurs fans are no longer allowed to bitch about refs, stern, etc. You were just given a game that saved you from playing @ portland in the first round. Dont you EVER bitch about officials again


There has been a lot of piss-poor officiating this season. And some of us have bitched about it even in games that had no effect on the Spurs. This was bad, but far from the worst we've seen.

[Larry89]

Some of you guys are just pure homers justifying that bullshit late shot lol

3 referees missed it thats just stupid, the same refs doings games in the playoffs feel better now?

[DeadlyDynasty]

0.4, game 6 against the kings, game 4 of 2008 wcf... should i keep going?

0.4=legit...notice only spurs fans dispute this because they are bitter bitches in denial.
Game 6 against Sacto: yeh, that was bad but Sacto choked away their game 7 at home by going 16-30 from the ft line and airballing in the clutch. They had their chances.
Game 4 last year: Those last-second contact jumpshots are NEVER called.

Spurs fans have the sandiest vajajay's

[timvp]

A suggestion to the Kings when they want to start winning again:

Invest in more red lights. Even on the replays, it's hard to tell how late it was because they have about 1/10th the amount of red lights that go off as everywhere else in the league. That'll cost ya when the crowd is loud and the refs can't hear the horn.

[Spurminator]

Clearly fortune is smiling upon us this season.

[peskypesky]

Clearly fortune is smiling upon us this season.

:lmao

[timvp]

Clearly fortune is smiling upon us this season.:lol

[DeadlyDynasty]

Why should Laker Fan impose a standard they aren't willing to follow?

FUCK YOU, BITCH

What the fuck are you talking about?

fuck you, tool. Enjoy being spanked out of the playoffs by Daddy again:hat

[ducks]

hopefully the basketball gods like spurs this postseason

[IronMexican]

I don't even think I can watch the NBA again. This was just dirty. Simply dirty.

[Mugen]

0.4=legit...notice only spurs fans dispute this because they are bitter bitches in denial.
Game 6 against Sacto: yeh, that was bad but Sacto choked away their game 7 at home by going 16-30 from the ft line and airballing in the clutch. They had their chances.
Game 4 last year: Those last-second contact jumpshots are NEVER called.

Spurs fans have the sandiest vajajay's

look man its not our fault you got handed two series against the spurs then proceeded to get your vaginas kicked in during the finals.

:toast

[ElNono]

I don't even think I can watch the NBA again. This was just dirty. Simply dirty.

Ehhh... you watch the Lakers... doesn't get any dirtier than that...

[superbigtime]

puh-leaze....horrible, horrible call. The best part about this is the fact that spurs fans are no longer allowed to bitch about refs, stern, etc. You were just given a game that saved you from playing @ portland in the first round. Dont you ever bitch about officials again

shut up moron laker bitch

[peskypesky]

I don't even think I can watch the NBA again. This was just dirty. Simply dirty.

Good. Adios.

[timvp]

Lakers fans complaining about the Kings getting screwed? GTFO. Seriously. Before Eagle, that was the scene of the original crime.

FTL.

[Mugen]

Lakers fans complaining about the Kings getting screwed? GTFO. Seriously. Before Eagle, that was the scene of the original crime.

FTL.

thats like O.J. complaining about the U.S. justice system.

[timvp]

Send Pau Gasol to the Spurs and we'll let the Kings have that win.

[peskypesky]

What the fuck are you talking about?

fuck you, tool. Enjoy being spanked out of the playoffs by Daddy again:hat

David Stern?

[peskypesky]

Send Pau Gasol to the Spurs and we'll let the Kings have that win.
:toast
:lmao

[IronMexican]

:lol

[DPG21920]

Lakers fans complaining about the Kings getting screwed? GTFO. Seriously. Before Eagle, that was the scene of the original crime.

FTL.

No shit. The Lakers screwed the Kings and ruined their franchise with alleged GAME FIXING. That.Is.Dirty.

[Spursfan092120]

0.4=legit...notice only spurs fans dispute this because they are bitter bitches in denial.
Game 6 against Sacto: yeh, that was bad but Sacto choked away their game 7 at home by going 16-30 from the ft line and airballing in the clutch. They had their chances.
Game 4 last year: Those last-second contact jumpshots are NEVER called.

Spurs fans have the sandiest vajajay's
You're an IDIOT..everybody discounts .4 EXCEPT Laker fans. It's even been shown that the clock didn't start in time. Don't give me that bullshit, Wonka.

[DeadlyDynasty]

shut up moron laker bitch

will you be here when LA beats the living shit outta the Spurs again? The lakers are sending your boys into early retirement

[IronMexican]

It's not the Lakers fault that the clock didn't start up the moment he touched the ball. How often does the clock even start the moment the ball is touched?

[daslicer]

Lakerfans complaining about the spurs winning due to the refs is equivalent to an alcoholic giving lectures to sober person on drinking responsibly.

[SenorSpur]

Spurs have received their share of some bullshit breaks and assorted "faux pas" by the officials this season. The Spurs have lost some games they should've won and, as in this case, won some they should've lost.

As for this particular game, it wasn't fair to the Kings that the Finley shot counted. Yet at this point, I don't give a shit about fair - we'll take it. I guess that's what the expression "it all evens out in the end" means.

[DPG21920]

It's not the Lakers fault that the clock didn't start up the moment he touched the ball. How often does the clock even start the moment the ball is touched?

Is this the Spurs fault?

[Milo]

It's not the Lakers fault that the clock didn't start up the moment he touched the ball. How often does the clock even start the moment the ball is touched?

It's not the Spurs fault that the refs missed the shot clock violation.
What's your point exactly?

[dougp]

A suggestion to the Kings when they want to start winning again:

Invest in more red lights. Even on the replays, it's hard to tell how late it was because they have about 1/10th the amount of red lights that go off as everywhere else in the league. That'll cost ya when the crowd is loud and the refs can't hear the horn.

I don't think people realize how important these are. Refs typically aren't looking at the ball AND the clock, so the only way to actually tell the shot clock is expired is big red lights that they can see in their peripheral vision.

[Jedicro]

We got BACK those few second fractions we lost against Houston.

Wait, what? The only shot that I can think of that even remotely fits what you're saying here is that Bonner 3 at the end of that last game..where y'all didn't even make the shot you got which was about as good as you were gonna get.

[Spursmania]

thats like O.J. complaining about the U.S. justice system.

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Spursmania]

Wait, what? The only shot that I can think of that even remotely fits what you're saying here is that Bonner 3 at the end of that last game..where y'all didn't even make the shot you got which was about as good as you were gonna get.

and you're a Spurs fan...meh...more like a:troll

the one post and your comment pretty much gives you away:lol

[lefty]

Not to jinx our team, but that's good Karma :D

[Spursfan092120]

Wait, what? The only shot that I can think of that even remotely fits what you're saying here is that Bonner 3 at the end of that last game..where y'all didn't even make the shot you got which was about as good as you were gonna get.
http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/STFU_NOOB.jpg
Do you really think with over a second left, Matt Freaking Bonner would have shot a 3 for the game winner for us? Please..with over a second left, we would have had plenty of time to set up a decent shot. You should change your favorite team...it damn sure isn't the Spurs if this is your first post on a Spurs forum.

[Jedicro]

and you're a Spurs fan...meh...more like a:troll

the one post and your comment pretty much gives you away:lol

I'm a Rockets fan. I never said I wasn't. I have nothing against the Spurs, but are you seriously complaining that you didn't have enough time when you got a clean shot? Bonner shot that ball as pure and missed.

Y'all did get hosed last year when there was no call on the Barry 3, but I can't see how you can complain when you MISSED the shot.

[Ice009]

PUH-LEAZE....horrible, horrible call. The best part about this is the fact that Spurs fans are no longer allowed to bitch about refs, stern, etc. You were just given a game that saved you from playing @ portland in the first round. Dont you EVER bitch about officials again

The best part about this is Laker fans like you are faggots.

YOU ARE A STRAIGHT UP FUCKING PUSSY.

Give us Gasol for Bonner, give us 0.4 back and then you can cry about the officiating you piece of shit.

[Jedicro]

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/STFU_NOOB.jpg
Do you really think with over a second left, Matt Freaking Bonner would have shot a 3 for the game winner for us? Please..with over a second left, we would have had plenty of time to set up a decent shot. You should change your favorite team...it damn sure isn't the Spurs if this is your first post on a Spurs forum.

You think you would have gotten a better look than that? Seriously? A wide open shot by a 45% 3 pt shooter, but that's bad offense? YOu make it seem like a 1.5 seconds is enough time to run a motion offense.

These two things are no where near on the same level.

[Ice009]

will you be here when LA beats the living shit outta the Spurs again? The lakers are sending your boys into early retirement

Too bad you fuckers didn't stay in your early retirement after Shaq left and Kobe bitched about his team mates, then got that gift wrapped Pau Gasol trade.

[Spursfan092120]

You think you would have gotten a better look than that? Seriously? A wide open shot by a 45% 3 pt shooter, but that's bad offense? YOu make it seem like a 1.5 seconds is enough time to run a motion offense.

These two things are no where near on the same level.
OK..it's official..you know shit about the Spurs. We are NOT giving Matt Bonner a game winning shot. PERIOD! If we have an opportunity, there's about 7 other guys we'd give a game winner before him. Get out of here with your bullshit...you ain't a fan of the Spurs..you don't even know a damn thing about them.

[Ice009]

It's not the Lakers fault that the clock didn't start up the moment he touched the ball. How often does the clock even start the moment the ball is touched?

And is this the Spurs fault?

Fuck, you Laker fans are total fucking retards.

[Spursfan092120]

Too bad you fuckers didn't stay in your early retirement after Shaq left and Kobe bitched about his team mates, then got that gift wrapped Pau Gasol trade.
And they STILL can't win a title... :lmao:lmao

[timvp]

Michael Finley shot that like he knew it shouldn't have counted.

:smokin

[SequSpur]

That was pretty weak...that shot was clearly late. And it's typical of you wrestling watchers to think that shit was cool.

but, it was against the kings, so wgaf..

[Spursfan092120]

And is this the Spurs fault?

Fuck, you Laker fans are total fucking retards.
Nah..don't bash on Iron Mexican..he's a good guy. He wasn't saying it was the Spurs fault on this occasion, that was Deadly Dynasty. Iron Mexican was just saying it wasn't the Lakers fault on the .4...and he's right..it was the stupid official's part, and the stupid rule. It should be changed, and I'm sure it will.

[Ice009]

It's not the Spurs fault that the refs missed the shot clock violation.
What's your point exactly?

His point is that he is a fucking retard and just OWNED himself in front of everyone with his pathetic statement.

He got owned by his own statement.

I wonder if the 80's Laker fans are better than this trash.

[Spursmania]

OK..it's official..you know shit about the Spurs. We are NOT giving Matt Bonner a game winning shot. PERIOD! If we have an opportunity, there's about 7 other guys we'd give a game winner before him. Get out of here with your bullshit...you ain't a fan of the Spurs..you don't even know a damn thing about them.

You speak the truth.:toast

[Spursfan092120]

That was pretty weak...that shot was clearly late. And it's typical of you wrestling watchers to think that shit was cool.

but, it was against the kings, so wgaf..
I'm a wrestling watcher..lol..but there's nothing cool about it. I'll definitely take that shit though. Helps us, helps Sacto...no problems here.

[Spursfan092120]

You speak the truth.:toast
Just get tired of fake fans and trolls, man. It's bullshit.

[Ice009]

Nah..don't bash on Iron Mexican..he's a good guy. He wasn't saying it was the Spurs fault on this occasion, that was Deadly Dynasty. Iron Mexican was just saying it wasn't the Lakers fault on the .4...and he's right..it was the stupid official's part, and the stupid rule. It should be changed, and I'm sure it will.

Fair enough. I thought he said it was the Spurs' fault.

[Spursfan092120]

Fair enough. I thought he said it was the Spurs' fault.
naw..that was Deadly Dynasty..the Laker fan that's a douchebag. Iron Mexican is one of the only sane Laker fans on here..him and Allanon are pretty good guys.

[Jedicro]

OK..it's official..you know shit about the Spurs. We are NOT giving Matt Bonner a game winning shot. PERIOD! If we have an opportunity, there's about 7 other guys we'd give a game winner before him. Get out of here with your bullshit...you ain't a fan of the Spurs..you don't even know a damn thing about them.

Dude, listen, I'm not trying to start an argument. Is it possible to have a civilized discussion? C'mon..

Back to the issue, you're stance on that game is delusional. 1.5 seconds isn't enough time to get a perfect shot. Our defense is going to key in on your big guys all day long. Do you think that Parker would have a better shot at hitting a contested fade-away 3? Cause' that's about all you were gonna get.

Furthermore, you say Bonner would never be given a last second shot....but....he did.

The shot Bonner got was far cleaner than anything you would have gotten. He shot it clean and virtually uncontested.

[exstatic]

I'm a Rockets fan. I never said I wasn't. I have nothing against the Spurs, but are you seriously complaining that you didn't have enough time when you got a clean shot? Bonner shot that ball as pure and missed.

Y'all did get hosed last year when there was no call on the Barry 3, but I can't see how you can complain when you MISSED the shot.

That foul occurred at like 1.5 left, but time ran off the clock, which was ALSO not reviewable. There a chance for a much better shot at 1.5 than there is at .4, unless you're the 2004 Lakers, then you can catch, jump stop into a major fadeaway and then shoot.

[Spursfan092120]

Dude, listen, I'm not trying to start an argument. Is it possible to have a civilized discussion? C'mon..

Back to the issue, you're stance on that game is delusional. 1.5 seconds isn't enough time to get a perfect shot. Our defense is going to key in on your big guys all day long. Do you think that Parker would have a better shot at hitting a contested fade-away 3? Cause' that's about all you were gonna get.

Furthermore, you say Bonner would never be given a last second shot....but....he did.

The shot Bonner got was far cleaner than anything you would have gotten. He shot it clean and virtually uncontested.
Perfect shot? no..but better than Bonner. Defenses key on our big guys all the time, we still get our shots. (and the fact that you say YOUR guys just PROVED your not a Spurs fan) Bonner was given that shot because it was forced. With 1.5 seconds, we can get a Mason jumper..there's a LOT more options that only .3 seconds, which means you have to have an EXTREMELY quick shot to even get it off. The only guy on our team to have a shot that fast is Bonner, which is the ONLY reason he got the shot. Please..if you want to have a discussion, think first.

[exstatic]

Dude, listen, I'm not trying to start an argument. Is it possible to have a civilized discussion? C'mon..

Back to the issue, you're stance on that game is delusional. 1.5 seconds isn't enough time to get a perfect shot. Our defense is going to key in on your big guys all day long. Do you think that Parker would have a better shot at hitting a contested fade-away 3? Cause' that's about all you were gonna get.

Furthermore, you say Bonner would never be given a last second shot....but....he did.

The shot Bonner got was far cleaner than anything you would have gotten. He shot it clean and virtually uncontested.

Dude, at 1.5, you can even make a second pass, or you can dribble once.

[SequSpur]

Bonner sucks.

[Spursfan092120]

Bonner sucks.
:lmao:lmao Damn Sequ..you really hate Matt, huh? He was bullshit tonight though...except for that one three.

[j-6]

http://www.geocities.com/actresses_on_screen/pictures/the_legend_of_billie_jean_tv_picture_020.jpg

[Jedicro]

That foul occurred at like 1.5 left, but time ran off the clock, which was ALSO not reviewable. There a chance for a much better shot at 1.5 than there is at .4, unless you're the 2004 Lakers, then you can catch, jump stop into a major fadeaway and then shoot.

First let me ask: are you working under the assumption that the league would have overturned that Bonner 3 had it gone in? I can tell you from experience, they wouldn't. See: Roy hitting a game winner against us that took more time than he had. That was a real hose job.

Back to the Rox Spurs game. I just fail to see how you think that 1 second would have given you a much better shot. Bonner got a WIDE OPEN shot. Look at the end of the game tonight and the shot they got off with about 1.3 left. Would you rather have that?

When you have barely more than a second left you don't exactly get a lot of choices. You would have either gotten the same shot or a worse shot if you had 1.5 for the exact same reason. Our defense would not have allowed Parker, Duncan, or Mason to get open easy shots. If you think a 3pt contested fade-away is a higher percentage shot than a set 3 then I'm done talking.

[EricB]

:lmao:lmao Damn Sequ..you really hate Matt, huh? He was bullshit tonight though...except for that one three.


WTF

Bonner hustled his ass off and battled for rebounds and left it all on the court.

Bonner may have missed shots but he gave all he had.

[SequSpur]

WTF

Bonner hustled his ass off and battled for rebounds and left it all on the court.

Bonner may have missed shots but he gave all he had.

well, that's great tpark...shit....zarko paspalj gave all he had also...

[Jedicro]

Perfect shot? no..but better than Bonner. Defenses key on our big guys all the time, we still get our shots. (and the fact that you say YOUR guys just PROVED your not a Spurs fan) Bonner was given that shot because it was forced. With 1.5 seconds, we can get a Mason jumper..there's a LOT more options that only .3 seconds, which means you have to have an EXTREMELY quick shot to even get it off. The only guy on our team to have a shot that fast is Bonner, which is the ONLY reason he got the shot. Please..if you want to have a discussion, think first.

I'm not.

Ok. If a guy dribbles, what does that accomplish? Either Shane Battier or Ron Artest are going to close any gap they may have had and force an impossible 30 foot contested fade away (see: the Kings last shot tonight)

If you pass...what does that accomplish? By the time the receiver of the pass gets it there won't be more than .5 or so left (catch ball-->see teamate-->time ball takes to get to him) then he'll get to have a contested fade away jumper with even less time on the clock. If you think one pass is good enough to get an easy shot you are really under-estimating the Rockets defense.

What you got was a wide open shot with a pure relase. No off balance contested fade-away. You would have gotten nothing better. And if you would have, you're talking about insignificant percentage increases.

[ElNono]

WTF

Bonner hustled his ass off and battled for rebounds and left it all on the court.

Bonner may have missed shots but he gave all he had.

What game did you watch? He couldn't control that Spencer Hawes guy, that had a career night. Giving it all he had and falling short is a recurrent theme with Matt. He probably is a really nice guy, but not a starter on an NBA team.

[EricB]

well, that's great tpark...shit....zarko paspalj gave all he had also...


When you decide to come with an intelligent, well thought, adult take, then I will take you seriously.

Till then, go back to the troll forum with the other 15 year olds, and STFU.

[EricB]

What game did you watch? He couldn't control that Spencer Hawes guy, that had a career night. Giving it all he had and falling short is a recurrent theme with Matt. He probably is a really nice guy, but not a starter on an NBA team.


What game did I watch?

I watched the game where Bonner was hustling for rebounds tipping them out and busting his ass.

Thats all I said.

Whatever though, keep up the Bonner hate, I'm shocked theres no, "Why is Michael Finley even in uniform" threads.

[Spursfan092120]

First let me ask: are you working under the assumption that the league would have overturned that Bonner 3 had it gone in? I can tell you from experience, they wouldn't. See: Roy hitting a game winner against us that took more time than he had. That was a real hose job.

Back to the Rox Spurs game. I just fail to see how you think that 1 second would have given you a much better shot. Bonner got a WIDE OPEN shot. Look at the end of the game tonight and the shot they got off with about 1.3 left. Would you rather have that?

When you have barely more than a second left you don't exactly get a lot of choices. You would have either gotten the same shot or a worse shot if you had 1.5 for the exact same reason. Our defense would not have allowed Parker, Duncan, or Mason to get open easy shots. If you think a 3pt contested fade-away is a higher percentage shot than a set 3 then I'm done talking.
First off, the Bonner 3 WOULD have counted, because the rule is that LESS than .3 seconds forces you to tip in. With .3, you CAN shoot..the Spurs asked the officials before the play even happened. 1.3 seconds would have given us a much better shot, as I already said. Read carefully. Bonner is not a game winning shooter..period..he's not clutch. We had Mason, we had Parker, we had other great players...screens would have gotten them open..PERIOD! Bonner had to shoot, because he was the only Spur who has a quick enough release to shoot a shot in .3 seconds. Add a second to that, and any player on the court, including Mason, has enough time to take the ball, maybe even get a shot fake and force a foul..ANYTHING could have happened...Take it from a guy who played college ball. .3 seconds and 1.3 seconds is a WORLD of difference.

[ElNono]

What game did I watch?

I watched the game where Bonner was hustling for rebounds tipping them out and busting his ass.

Thats all I said.

Whatever though, keep up the Bonner hate, I'm shocked theres no, "Why is Michael Finley even in uniform" threads.

It would be 'hate' if this would be the exception, not the rule. And 'hustling for rebounds and tipping them' while not getting possession of the ball is useless. See Kurt Thomas for a useful rebounder. Shit, Nocioni had more rebounds than Matt tonight. But I guess that considering he's been unable to get more than 3 rebounds a game lately, I should be grateful he got 7 tonight.

[loveforthegame]

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l315/Jamz1976/Sports/445.jpg

The backboard isn't lit up even though the shot clock shows 00. Could that be why the refs missed the call?

[SequSpur]

When you decide to come with an intelligent, well thought, adult take, then I will take you seriously.

Till then, go back to the troll forum with the other 15 year olds, and STFU.

you consider your bullshit pointless drivel intelligent? Shit, the only thing you may have ever said that was intelligent would've been a compliment to something I said.

smb.

[Spursfan092120]

I'm not.

Ok. If a guy dribbles, what does that accomplish? Either Shane Battier or Ron Artest are going to close any gap they may have had and force an impossible 30 foot contested fade away (see: the Kings last shot tonight)

If you pass...what does that accomplish? By the time the receiver of the pass gets it there won't be more than .5 or so left (catch ball-->see teamate-->time ball takes to get to him) then he'll get to have a contested fade away jumper with even less time on the clock. If you think one pass is good enough to get an easy shot you are really under-estimating the Rockets defense.

What you got was a wide open shot with a pure relase. No off balance contested fade-away. You would have gotten nothing better. And if you would have, you're talking about insignificant percentage increases.
No dribbling...would have been a ball fake. And you really think that with 1.3 seconds, the only shot the Spurs are going to get is a contested 30 foot fadeaway jumper? Come on dude..please..you must have NEVER played the game. No passing either. But we have a lot more time, and a better, more clutch shooter could have gotten a shot off. Bonner is not a clutch shooter. Everyone knew Bonner's shot wasn't going in. He is NOT our clutch shooter. We could have gotten many things. A ball fake and a foul...a better shooter coming off a screen. Please dude...your arguments are giving me a headache..this is pure ignorance.

[EricB]

It would be 'hate' if this would be the exception, not the rule. And 'hustling for rebounds and tipping them' while not getting possession of the ball is useless. See Kurt Thomas for a useful rebounder. Shit, Nocioni had more rebounds than Matt tonight. But I guess that considering he's been unable to get more than 3 rebounds a game lately, I should be grateful he got 7 tonight.


How about pointing the hate from Bonner to Drew Gooden.

He was supposedly gonna be the "rebounding saviour" when he was signed.

[EricB]

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l315/Jamz1976/Sports/445.jpg

The backboard isn't lit up even though the shot clock shows 00. Could that be why the refs missed the call?


I see two refs looking to see if his feet are behind the line.

[EricB]

womp womp womp waahhhh.


Man you sound like the teacher from those peanuts cartoons...

[ElNono]

How about pointing the hate from Bonner to Drew Gooden.

He was supposedly gonna be the "rebounding saviour" when he was signed.

He's already averaging more rebounds per minute than Bonner and he only been a Spur for what, 15 games or so? Not only that, he's averaging more points too. He's no saviour, and I said so when we signed him up, but if you don't see the marked improvement in rebounding when he's on the floor, then you're not looking.

[EricB]

He's already averaging more rebounds per minute than Bonner and he only been a Spur for what, 15 games or so? Not only that, he's averaging more points too. He's no saviour, and I said so when we signed him up, but if you don't see the marked improvement in rebounding when he's on the floor, then you're not looking.


Yeah those 1 and 2 rebounding games Goodens had lately have just made the Spurs a rebounding machine.

Hell he had a whopping 5 tonight.

WHEW! WOW.

[ElNono]

Yeah those 1 and 2 rebounding games Goodens had lately have just made the Spurs a rebounding machine.

Hell he had a whopping 5 tonight.

WHEW! WOW.

In 22 minutes... plus 9 points... vs 7 rebounds and 7 points in 34 minutes for Bonner... He was so bad lately that Pop decided to play him in the crunch against Utah...

And BTW, he had 4 rebounds against Utah.... vs 3 for Bonner...

Again, do you watch the games?

[EricB]

In 22 minutes... plus 9 points... vs 7 rebounds and 7 points in 34 minutes for Bonner... He was so bad lately that Pop decided to play him in the crunch against Utah...

And BTW, he had 4 rebounds against Utah.... vs 3 for Bonner...

Again, do you watch the games?


4 whole rebounds.

Knock me over with a feather, just a machine.

[Spursfan092120]

In all seriousness, Drew Gooden is the best big playing next to Timmy since David. He's a guy we can give the ball to when we have no offense. He's one of the only players on our team who can create his own shot. He can work on any defender in the block and get a bucket. If forced to choose, I'd drop Bonner before Gooden before the question even arose...period.

[EricB]

In all seriousness, Drew Gooden is the best big playing next to Timmy since David. He's a guy we can give the ball to when we have no offense. He's one of the only players on our team who can create his own shot. He can work on any defender in the block and get a bucket. If forced to choose, I'd drop Bonner before Gooden before the question even arose...period.


Gooden so far is too fucking erratic.

Tonight he looked pathetic on offense.

[Jedicro]

No dribbling...would have been a ball fake. And you really think that with 1.3 seconds, the only shot the Spurs are going to get is a contested 30 foot fadeaway jumper? Come on dude..please..you must have NEVER played the game. No passing either. But we have a lot more time, and a better, more clutch shooter could have gotten a shot off. Bonner is not a clutch shooter. Everyone knew Bonner's shot wasn't going in. He is NOT our clutch shooter. We could have gotten many things. A ball fake and a foul...a better shooter coming off a screen. Please dude...your arguments are giving me a headache..this is pure ignorance.

Pretty much. With the exception of a major defensive lapse we would not have allowed a throw into the interior or an even remotely open look by one of your top players. Look at every single last second play there has ever been, even against poor defensive teams. The ball is passed to somebody way out past the 3 pt line, the defenders close and contest, and the shooter misses it probably 90% of the time. There is no play that can get somebody open in that time outside of a defense meltdown, and if you're argument rests on that or the liklihood of a stupid foul or even a ref calling a foul in that siutation then it's dead in the water.

My rproblem with your argument is that you're assuming you would have gotten a high percentage shot with something as simple as a ball fake or a dribble. If basketball were that easy teams would score 300 points a game. I'm not saying that extra second doesn't make a difference, but what I'm saying is that you wouldn't have gotten a better shot than what you did. The only reason that shot was that open is that we didn't expect Bonner to be the recipient of the pass. Had Mason or Parker or anybody else gotten the ball our defense would have swarmed.

And don't drop the, "I played college ball, and trust me..." junk. That means absolutely nothing. And for someone who played college ball you sure have a pretty simple view of how to get an open shot or the value of high percentage looks versus an impossible shot by a "clutch" shooter.

One more thing, I brought up the Roy thing because Bonner's shot physically took more than .4 seconds. It was closer to .6 or so.

Sorry for long post :p:

[exstatic]

Gooden is a better post option than Bonner, but if you need rebounding, dial 40. Gooden's rebounding rate is about 75% of KT's.

[EricB]

Gooden is a better post option than Bonner, but if you need rebounding, dial 40. Gooden's rebounding rate is about 75% of KT's.


BTW, adding to that, Bonner and Gooden should never be out there together.

Gooden and Duncan should start, then Thomas and Bonner in, then whoever is playing best after that, gets the minutes.

[ElNono]

4 whole rebounds.

Knock me over with a feather, just a machine.

Bonner is the starter... that's what you don't get. He's been with the team 2 years, starting 1 year. Gooden at least has an excuse, he's been around for just a month. Yet, the new guy consistently out-produces the guy that should be acclimated by now. And you can bet I'm gonna call Gooden out if two years from now he puts back to back 3 rebound games in 20+ minutes.

Hustle doesn't mean shit if you don't get it done. Why do you think we had to go get Gooden at all if Bonner was fitting the bill? He's been a disappointment, and the coaching staff you love to praise pretty much stated so when they were desperate to find another big midway through the season.

[ElNono]

Gooden so far is too fucking erratic.

Tonight he looked pathetic on offense.

He barely knows his teammates, what do you expect? Doesn't the Spurs have the largest play book in the league or something like that? What's Bonner excuse?

[EricB]

He barely knows his teammates, what do you expect? Doesn't the Spurs have the largest play book in the league or something like that? What's Bonner excuse?


Yeah that whole dump the ball to him and clear out and let him work really has him stymied.


Whats Bonner's excuse for what on offense?

He's a shooter from the perimiter.

[KidCongo]

Fair is foul, Foul is fair.

[ElNono]

Yeah that whole dump the ball to him and clear out and let him work really has him stymied.

Whats Bonner's excuse for what on offense?

He's a shooter from the perimiter.

Nice. I thought we were talking about shitty rebounding...

[Ice009]

What game did I watch?

I watched the game where Bonner was hustling for rebounds tipping them out and busting his ass.

Thats all I said.

Whatever though, keep up the Bonner hate, I'm shocked theres no, "Why is Michael Finley even in uniform" threads.

Are you sure you know who Matt Bonner is? He's not the guy that was wearing number 40 out there.

Matt Bonner was the guy that had the ball bounce out of his hands on rebounds and let his man score on him at will ;).

I will agree that Matt tried his ass off, but he's still getting too many minutes.

[kace]

why are we even talking about 0.4 and fisher's foul on barry in the same thread as this meaningless bad call on finley's 3 ?

we're comparing PO game (and maybe title) deciding bad calls and meaningless RS game bad call (and not even deciding one since there still would have been an OT to win this game).

the only bad call that could came close in favor of the spurs would be the non-call on bowen last second foul on LBJ in 07. and it wouldn't even be closed to the LA ones because on this serie, we were so obviously better than the cavs that he wouldn't have changed the outcome.

[kobyz]

why are we even talking about 0.4 and fisher's foul on barry in the same thread as this meaningless bad call on finley's 3 ?

we're comparing PO game (and maybe title) deciding bad calls and meaningless RS game bad call (and not even deciding one since there still would have been an OT to win this game).

the only bad call that could came close in favor of the spurs would be the non-call on bowen last second foul on LBJ in 07. and it wouldn't even be closed to the LA ones because on this serie, we were so obviously better than the cavs that he wouldn't have changed the outcome.

the bowen non call was actually bad for the spurs cause that give the cavs opportunity for a three instead of two free throw and they were down by 3!

[kace]

the bowen non call was actually bad for the spurs cause that give the cavs opportunity for a three instead of two free throw and they were down by 3!

could have been 3 FT

[kobyz]

could have been 3 FT

not at all, the foul was before the shot

[kace]

not at all, the foul was before the shot

i've seen dozens of these fouls, who began before the shot, still classified as shooting foul, especially with a superstar like LBJ. i even remember some columnist (bspn i think) claiming it should have been 3 FT.


so, COULD have been 3 FT, IMHO. we've seen worse.

anyway, recently, that's the only bad call in favor of the spurs that i can remember comparable to the LA's ones (i mean with some consequence, in PO, late in the game....).

[rascal]

Even had the spurs won the .4 second game there is no guarantee they take that series. They went on to lose game 6 so they would have had to win a game 7 in LA.

[SpursFanInAustin]

Even had the spurs won the .4 second game there is no guarantee they take that series. They went on to lose game 6 so they would have had to win a game 7 in SA.

Fixed :hat

[Spursfan092120]

Pretty much. With the exception of a major defensive lapse we would not have allowed a throw into the interior or an even remotely open look by one of your top players. Look at every single last second play there has ever been, even against poor defensive teams. The ball is passed to somebody way out past the 3 pt line, the defenders close and contest, and the shooter misses it probably 90% of the time. There is no play that can get somebody open in that time outside of a defense meltdown, and if you're argument rests on that or the liklihood of a stupid foul or even a ref calling a foul in that siutation then it's dead in the water.

My rproblem with your argument is that you're assuming you would have gotten a high percentage shot with something as simple as a ball fake or a dribble. If basketball were that easy teams would score 300 points a game. I'm not saying that extra second doesn't make a difference, but what I'm saying is that you wouldn't have gotten a better shot than what you did. The only reason that shot was that open is that we didn't expect Bonner to be the recipient of the pass. Had Mason or Parker or anybody else gotten the ball our defense would have swarmed.

And don't drop the, "I played college ball, and trust me..." junk. That means absolutely nothing. And for someone who played college ball you sure have a pretty simple view of how to get an open shot or the value of high percentage looks versus an impossible shot by a "clutch" shooter.

One more thing, I brought up the Roy thing because Bonner's shot physically took more than .4 seconds. It was closer to .6 or so.

Sorry for long post :p:
OK..let me try this again..you don't seem to be listening to me. Ball screen dude..ball screen. Yes, your defense probably would have swarmed..but with only 1.3 seconds, they wouldn't have had time to get to a player who had just gotten open with a ball screen. And once more, read closely, Bonner would not have taken a game winning shot. He is not clutch in any way, shape, or form. He was the last guy on the court we would have given the ball to, except we needed a quick shot. We would have gotten a MUCH better shot off than that in 1.3 seconds..period. I know this team, and I know the game...trust me.

[Spursfan092120]

Gooden so far is too fucking erratic.

Tonight he looked pathetic on offense.
Dude..seriously? And Bonner? Come on man..you can't call Gooden erratic and praise Bonner..that's ridiculous. Even in Gooden's "pathetic" offense, he still scored 9 points, 2 more than Bonner. Bonner has had nights where he plays for 30 minutes, gets no points and one rebound. Come on Eric...you're better than that. Gooden is better than Bonner..you know it, I know it. When was the last time Bonner got 20 points a game for 3 games in a row? The guy isn't going to score 20 every game...but scoring below 20 doesn't mean he's erratic, it means he's human. But at the same time, he IS better than Bonner, period.

[EricB]

Even had the spurs won the .4 second game there is no guarantee they take that series. They went on to lose game 6 so they would have had to win a game 7 in LA.

Game 7 would've been in San Antonio dumbass.

[EricB]

Dude..seriously? And Bonner? Come on man..you can't call Gooden erratic and praise Bonner..that's ridiculous. Even in Gooden's "pathetic" offense, he still scored 9 points, 2 more than Bonner. Bonner has had nights where he plays for 30 minutes, gets no points and one rebound. Come on Eric...you're better than that. Gooden is better than Bonner..you know it, I know it. When was the last time Bonner got 20 points a game for 3 games in a row? The guy isn't going to score 20 every game...but scoring below 20 doesn't mean he's erratic, it means he's human. But at the same time, he IS better than Bonner, period.


The reason the guy scores so much is because hes a goddamn ballhog.

Hes the reincarnation of Ron Mercer its pathetic.

[ElNono]

The reason the guy scores so much is because hes a goddamn ballhog.

Hes the reincarnation of Ron Mercer its pathetic.

I watched the game where Gooden was hustling for rebounds tipping them out and busting his ass.

Whatever though, keep up the Gooden hate, I'm shocked theres no, "Why is Michael Finley even in uniform" threads.

[Spursfan092120]

The reason the guy scores so much is because hes a goddamn ballhog.

Hes the reincarnation of Ron Mercer its pathetic.
Dude...come on...you're kidding, right? Ballhog? Dude..he's the best scoring option we have off our bench right now. Pop WANTS him to shoot the ball. That's why we brought him in here. You didn't think we brought him in for his fantastic defensive ability, did you? (though he's still better at D than Bonner). I like Bonner, don't get me wrong...but Gooden is much better..you've GOT to know that.

[Dex]

The reason the guy scores so much is because hes a goddamn ballhog.

Hes the reincarnation of Ron Mercer its pathetic.

Drew Gooden might be a black hole on offense, but at least he can actually put the ball in the hole. I don't mind letting him try to create his own offense, especially during those periods where everybody is hovering around the perimeter and tossing up bricks.

[Jedicro]

OK..let me try this again..you don't seem to be listening to me. Ball screen dude..ball screen. Yes, your defense probably would have swarmed..but with only 1.3 seconds, they wouldn't have had time to get to a player who had just gotten open with a ball screen. And once more, read closely, Bonner would not have taken a game winning shot. He is not clutch in any way, shape, or form. He was the last guy on the court we would have given the ball to, except we needed a quick shot. We would have gotten a MUCH better shot off than that in 1.3 seconds..period. I know this team, and I know the game...trust me.

Oh, I forgot that a ball screen is the most effective play in all of basketball. If only someone could invent some sort of defensive switch. Where like, the defender who is guarding the screener switches to teh person who receives the ball off the screen. They could call it something weird like, I don't know, a rotation.

Once again, it would have been contested, and off balance. He wouldn't even be able to shoot the ball, he would be throwing it at the basket. Sure you may have gotten a shot for a clutch shooter, but if you expect any player to make a difficult shot like that at any remotely high percentage or if you expect a ball screen to give him all the space in teh world you're delusional.

And don't say Matt Bonner's the only one that can get taht shot off. He didn't get it off fast enough any ways. I said this earlier, that shot took closer to .5 or .6 sec.

[rascal]

Game 7 would've been in San Antonio dumbass.


Would not say dumbass, just lazy. I didn't bother to check out where game 7 was. Still I did not like the spur chances in a game 7 as they just folded in game 6 after the tough loss. That was not a championship makeup team, the way they could not battle back to win game 6.

[ElNono]

Would not say dumbass, just lazy. I didn't bother to check out where game 7 was. Still I did not like the spur chances in a game 7 as they just folded in game 6 after the tough loss. That was not a championship makeup team, the way they could not battle back to win game 6.

You're just stupid. We lost game 6 at home against the Pistons in the NBA Finals a year later, and won game 7 afterwards...

[Spursfan092120]

Oh, I forgot that a ball screen is the most effective play in all of basketball. If only someone could invent some sort of defensive switch. Where like, the defender who is guarding the screener switches to teh person who receives the ball off the screen. They could call it something weird like, I don't know, a rotation.

Once again, it would have been contested, and off balance. He wouldn't even be able to shoot the ball, he would be throwing it at the basket. Sure you may have gotten a shot for a clutch shooter, but if you expect any player to make a difficult shot like that at any remotely high percentage or if you expect a ball screen to give him all the space in teh world you're delusional.

And don't say Matt Bonner's the only one that can get taht shot off. He didn't get it off fast enough any ways. I said this earlier, that shot took closer to .5 or .6 sec.
A ball screen is different when it comes when the ball is passed in from the sidelines. You can do a hidden backscreen which can confuse the defense. I've seen it done many times to where the shooter is wide open. You tell me that we wouldn't have enough time to get a better shot, but you really think you'd have enough time to find the screen and switch, or even rotate the defense before a shot gets off? Please dude..you're wrong. Just give it up.

[SpursWench21]

I thought that long Mason 3pt to tie the game was pretty clutch. well done Mason. As for the Kings being screwed...honestly it sucks to be the team getting shit for something they couldnt control, but we definitely will take it. And come on, i know this isnt the point, but what were the Kings really getting screwed out of? not clinching the worst record....which they did. They were just out there playing ball as spoiler and we escaped barely. Now, if anything people should be talking and making lists of all the rules that need to be changed in the offseason...including this one.

yes. A LIST OF RULES THAT SHOULD BE CHANGED IN THE OFF-SEASON could be a nice thread to start. Im just too lazy to start it. Go SPURS!

[rascal]

You're just stupid. We lost game 6 at home against the Pistons in the NBA Finals a year later, and won game 7 afterwards...


I picked the spurs over the Pistons in that series. I thought the spurs would take game 7.

Anyways different years, different teams. So stupid you to even draw a comparison between two different series in different years between different teams.

[Jedicro]

A ball screen is different when it comes when the ball is passed in from the sidelines. You can do a hidden backscreen which can confuse the defense. I've seen it done many times to where the shooter is wide open. You tell me that we wouldn't have enough time to get a better shot, but you really think you'd have enough time to find the screen and switch, or even rotate the defense before a shot gets off? Please dude..you're wrong. Just give it up.

Do me a favor. Look up all games that come down to a shot with about 1.5 seconds left where the shot could tie or win the game and tell me how often they succeed. I guarentee it's not better than 30%.

The shot taht Bonner got he will make more than 30% of the time, even if he's not clutch. So you're arguing that you wish you could replay it to likely get a lower percentage shot. You're grasping at straws.

[Jedicro]

Also all a rotation is is two players switiching when there's been a screen. It's not that difficult.

[ElNono]

I picked the spurs over the Pistons in that series. I thought the spurs would take game 7.

Anyways different years, different teams. So stupid you to even draw a comparison between two different series in different years between different teams.

The point is, you can't argue that team didn't 'have it' because they lost a game 6. If not for that .4 shot, that team would have been up 3-2 with home court for game 7, which would have given them a considerable margin to work with. It's not that much different than Game 4 of the WCF last year. If Barry gets that call and we win the game, the series goes back to zero and it's a 3 game series. Does it guarantee anything? No. But it does give you a margin of error in case the next game is not your best.

[1Parker1]

Kings fans should be thank us...more losses increases their Lotto chances :)

[rascal]

The point is, you can't argue that team didn't 'have it' because they lost a game 6. If not for that .4 shot, that team would have been up 3-2 with home court for game 7, which would have given them a considerable margin to work with. It's not that much different than Game 4 of the WCF last year. If Barry gets that call and we win the game, the series goes back to zero and it's a 3 game series. Does it guarantee anything? No. But it does give you a margin of error in case the next game is not your best.

The point is that many just assume the spurs would win that series if they take the .4 game. Not happening with that team in that year.

Again you continue to compare different teams in different years. The spurs were not beatiung the Lakers last year if Barry gets the call or not. The lakers were the better team and have proven it on the court against the spurs winning 6 out of the last 8 times they have played and being the top seed the last two years.

Getting Gasol for nothing put them over the top.
Hard for some here to accept but the lakers are the better team now.

[rascal]

The point is, you can't argue that team didn't 'have it' because they lost a game 6. If not for that .4 shot, that team would have been up 3-2 with home court for game 7, which would have given them a considerable margin to work with. It's not that much different than Game 4 of the WCF last year. If Barry gets that call and we win the game, the series goes back to zero and it's a 3 game series. Does it guarantee anything? No. But it does give you a margin of error in case the next game is not your best.

A team with championship heart takes games 6 and games 7 after dropping the .4 game.

The spurs could not even get game 6. That team did not have the championship makeup to be a champion.

[jack sommerset]

Shitty call but who gives a fuck. Means little. Kings, it only helps with the ping pong balls. Won't help Spews get that second seed so they will be bounced in 1st round. Nothing to see here.

[EricB]

Would not say dumbass, just lazy. I didn't bother to check out where game 7 was. Still I did not like the spur chances in a game 7 as they just folded in game 6 after the tough loss. That was not a championship makeup team, the way they could not battle back to win game 6.


They didn't fold up at all, they had the lead at halftime and the Lakers pulled away a bit in the 4th quarter.

Try again dumbass.

[ElNono]

The point is that many just assume the spurs would win that series if they take the .4 game. Not happening with that team in that year.

The fallacy in your argument is assuming that the Spurs don't win the series if they win that game. It would actually have been a repeat of the '03 series against LA, where the bottom came off in LA when the pressure mounted for them. That LA team was not that good. They got Payton at the point and Malone ended up injured. They eventually lost to pretty much the same Pistons team we beat a year later in the Finals.
The reality is that the makeup of the Spurs has changed relatively little over the years because it's always been about Duncan and then everyone else. To say that Duncan had heart one season, but not the other is pretty retarded.


Again you continue to compare different teams in different years. The spurs were not beatiung the Lakers last year if Barry gets the call or not. The lakers were the better team and have proven it on the court against the spurs winning 6 out of the last 8 times they have played and being the top seed the last two years.


I'm not so sure about that. Those that remember the actual games, recall the Spurs dominating the Lakers in the first half of the first game, taking a 20 point lead until the legs got tired. Game 3 was a very solid victory and Game 4 was competitive to the end. Again, we were one call away from making it a 3 game series shootout.


Getting Gasol for nothing put them over the top.
Hard for some here to accept but the lakers are the better team now.

Getting Gasol made them contenders again. You need to actually win a championship to say they're over the top.

[BlackBellamy]

0.4, game 6 against the kings, game 4 of 2008 wcf... should i keep going?
Let us not forget the mugging of Brent Barry by D-Fish last year.