Crawford & Spurs' losses

[peskypesky]

"San Antonio had won six straight and was on a 12-1 roll. The only loss came against Indiana — another game that Crawford worked and another game that he rang up a T on Duncan."

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/story.asp?id=302164

[boutons_]

The Spurs' 2nd half-season losses to Pacers, Celts, and Bucks, killing their chances for 2nd seed, were exclusively the Spurs'/Tim's own fault, not Crawford or anybody else's.

[LilMissSPURfect]

The Spurs' 2nd half-season losses to Pacers, Celts, and Bucks, killing their chances for 2nd seed, were exclusively the Spurs'/Tim's own fault, not Crawford or anybody else's.


agreed! losses yes! T's no

[peskypesky]

I'm just pointing out facts.

[LEONARD]

hmmmmmmmm

[FromWayDowntown]

I was at the game in Indiana and even had the opportunity to sit courtside for the 3rd quarter and the early 4th. Nothing that Joey Crawford did that night cost the Spurs that game, and I think its shameful to imply that he might have. Joey t'd Timmy up that night in the 3rd quarter. I was about 30-40 feet from the play when it happened and Timmy's complaining about a call warranted the technical that he got. The rest, however, was about the Spurs playing bad basketball, which, again, had nothing to do with Joey Crawford.

[peskypesky]

Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions...The conclusion I've drawn is that Crawford has a quick whistle with Duncan. I think he has a personal beef with him. And I think he should be fired (or at least suspended) for what he did yesterday. That's my opinion. Call it "shameful" if you want, but there are a LOT of people who agree with me...fans and analysts alike.

[FromWayDowntown]

Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions...The conclusion I've drawn is that Crawford has a quick whistle with Duncan. I think he has a personal beef with him. And I think he should be fired (or at least suspended) for what he did yesterday. That's my opinion. Call it "shameful" if you want, but there are a LOT of people who agree with me...fans and analysts alike.

Drawing a conclusion that a referee is responsible for losses takes the focus away from the fact that the Spurs played poorly when it mattered in Indianapolis, and that had absolutely nothing to do with Joey Crawford.

Saying Joey Crawford has a "quick whistle" with Duncan -- notwithstanding the technicals -- is ridiculous. Yesterday, Tim played 27 minutes with Crawford on the floor. He was called for 1 foul, and offensive foul that Leroy Richardson whistled him for. Yeah, Joey definitely overreacted in doling out the T's, but nothing about the play of the game suggests in any way that Joey was treating Tim differently while Tim was on the floor, which is (I guess) the suggestion you're trying to make here.

Joey Crawford's lack of discretion yesterday was abominable, I think. But to blame the Spurs' loss yesterday, or the loss in Indianapolis for that matter, on Joey Crawford's treatment of Tim Duncan is sour grapes. Without Tim, the Spurs had a chance to win that game, but played too poorly to accomplish that goal. That's the game story. I'm not sure that anyone can truly argue that the sideshow involving the Duncan-Crawford incident was decisive in the game.

[nkdlunch]

Crawford was directly responsible for the Spurs loss yesterday. fact.

[FromWayDowntown]

Crawford was directly responsible for the Spurs loss yesterday. fact.

It was a factor. But even with that factor in the equation, the Spurs had their opportunities, and Joey Crawford didn't have anything to do with the fact that the Spurs didn't capitalize on those opportunities.

[George Gervin's Afro]

It was a factor. But even with that factor in the equation, the Spurs had their opportunities, and Joey Crawford didn't have anything to do with the fact that the Spurs didn't capitalize on those opportunities.


And missed open 3's... no wait I'd rather blame crawford for those.. :lol

[nkdlunch]

It was a factor. But even with that factor in the equation, the Spurs had their opportunities, and Joey Crawford didn't have anything to do with the fact that the Spurs didn't capitalize on those opportunities.

ok then. eject Nash in 3rd quarter in a close game vs. mavs and I'd bet my house Suns lose.

same thing w/Duncan

[peskypesky]

It was a factor. But even with that factor in the equation, the Spurs had their opportunities, and Joey Crawford didn't have anything to do with the fact that the Spurs didn't capitalize on those opportunities.

You're contradicting yourself.

[FromWayDowntown]

You're contradicting yourself.

No, I'm not. Sure, Duncan's ejection was a factor in the game. But it isn't THE reason the Spurs lost. That's what you seem to be implying and I, frankly, think arguments implying that officials cost a team a game are weak.

The Spurs had an opportunity to win the game yesterday without Tim Duncan, didn't they? After all, the game was tied with under 1 minute to play and the Spurs had several possesions on which they could have either taken the lead or at least tied the game. They came up short on each one of those possessions. That's why they lost.

[nkdlunch]

No, I'm not. Sure, Duncan's ejection was a factor in the game. But it isn't THE reason the Spurs lost. That's what you seem to be implying and I, frankly, think arguments implying that officials cost a team a game are weak.

The Spurs had an opportunity to win the game yesterday without Tim Duncan, didn't they? After all, the game was tied with under 1 minute to play and the Spurs had several possesions on which they could have either taken the lead or at least tied the game. They came up short on each one of those possessions. That's why they lost.

I would have the opportunity to beat Duncan on 1 on 1. what's your point.

we lost the game because we didn't have Duncan. is that so hard to understand?

[mardigan]

Outside the Lines is doing a piece on Duncan, the show just started

[FromWayDowntown]

I would have the opportunity to beat Duncan on 1 on 1. what's your point.

we lost the game because we didn't have Duncan. is that so hard to understand?

So you're 100% certain that if Duncan had played the 4th quarter, the Spurs would have won the game? Absolutely, no doubt about it, positive?

I'm not sure how anyone can actually know that.

[peskypesky]

No, I'm not. Sure, Duncan's ejection was a factor in the game. But it isn't THE reason the Spurs lost. That's what you seem to be implying and I, frankly, think arguments implying that officials cost a team a game are weak.

The Spurs had an opportunity to win the game yesterday without Tim Duncan, didn't they? After all, the game was tied with under 1 minute to play and the Spurs had several possesions on which they could have either taken the lead or at least tied the game. They came up short on each one of those possessions. That's why they lost.

Do you even know what a "factor" is?

You can't say "Duncan's ejection was a factor in the game" and then claim that it did not contribute to the loss.

[nkdlunch]

So you're 100% certain that if Duncan had played the 4th quarter, the Spurs would have won the game? Absolutely, no doubt about it, positive?

I'm not sure how anyone can actually know that.

how about this:
Duncan's loss was the BIGGEST factor that contributed to losing the game. Bigger by far than any other factor.

if you can't agree with that, I give up. :rolleyes

[peskypesky]

fac·tor /ˈfæktər/
–noun
1. one of the elements contributing to a particular result or situation:

[FromWayDowntown]

Do you even know what a "factor" is?

You can't say "Duncan's ejection was a factor in the game" and then claim that it did not contribute to the loss.

Sure I do. Just as a player's injury might be a "factor" in a game. But the player's injury isn't what decides whether the team wins or loses. I don't see how you can continue to ignore the fact that the Spurs had the lead for virtually all of the 4th quarter and had opportunities to: (1) extend the lead at a number of points; and (2) tie and retake the lead late.

Those things were true without Duncan. And as I noted above, unless you can show me with 100% certainty that the ultimate result would have been different had Duncan played, I don't buy that the factor of Tim's ejection was the cause of the Spurs loss yesterday.

[FromWayDowntown]

how about this:
Duncan's loss was the BIGGEST factor that contributed to losing the game. Bigger by far than any other factor.

if you can't agree with that, I give up. :rolleyes

Hmmm. Silly me -- I thought it was all of the missed shots in the 4th quarter.

Maybe that's just me. Tim Duncan must have the mystical power to make wayward shots from his teammates find the bottom of the net when he's on the floor.

[nkdlunch]

It was the biggest factor by far. so when someone asks you why Spurs lost?

short answer: we didn't have Duncan

long answer: we didn't have Duncan and we also missed our shots in the 4th.

[FromWayDowntown]

Only answer: Spurs didn't score as many points as the Mavericks did.

[mardigan]

I blame Brent Barry

[nkdlunch]

Hmmm. Silly me -- I thought it was all of the missed shots in the 4th quarter.

Maybe that's just me. Tim Duncan must have the mystical power to make wayward shots from his teammates find the bottom of the net when he's on the floor.

you are saying missing our shots in the 4th is a bigger factor than missing DUncan????!?!

ok. I really give up now.

[greensborohill]

Fact: San Antonio scored 10 points in the 4th, none in the last 6+ minutes.
Even w/o Duncan, they are a damned pro basketball team, and a contender at that. They just got shut down in the 4th.

[Bandwagon Bill]

Duncan commands doubles and opens up shooter as well as opening up the lane for Manu and TP.

[nkdlunch]

w/out Duncan we are not contenders.

[peskypesky]

Even after supplying you with a definition, you still don't get it. You should refrain from using the term "factor" until you understand what it means.

If, as you claim, the loss of Duncan did not contribute to the loss, then you need to say that Duncan's ejection was NOT a factor.

[peskypesky]

w/out Duncan we are not contenders.

You would think that's obvious, but to some lame-brains, the Spurs are just as good without Duncan as they are with him.

[aaronstampler]

Hmmm. Silly me -- I thought it was all of the missed shots in the 4th quarter.

Maybe that's just me. Tim Duncan must have the mystical power to make wayward shots from his teammates find the bottom of the net when he's on the floor.


Are you retarded? It's a team sport, they don't play in a vacuum. If Duncan is on the floor then maybe HE gets some of those shots and the "wayward shooters" don't. Or maybe the Mavs have to pay more defensive attention to Tim and Manu, Tony and the rest get easier looks.

Plus, with Tim back there on defense, maybe the Mavs don't even score enough points to come back. How obtuse are you?

[FromWayDowntown]

Duncan commands doubles and opens up shooter as well as opening up the lane for Manu and TP.

Sure. But when he opens up shooters, they still have to make shots. It's not as if the guys who took shots in the last half of the 4th quarter didn't have good looks at the basket. The looks that they got they didn't knock down. There have been far too many games this season in which the Spurs shooters haven't been able to knock down important shots to convince me that Duncan's ejection was the biggest cause (or even a significant cause) of the loss yesterday.

[FromWayDowntown]

Even after supplying you with a definition, you still don't get it. You should refrain from using the term "factor" until you understand what it means.

If, as you claim, the loss of Duncan did not contribute to the loss, then you need to say that Duncan's ejection was NOT a factor.

You're right -- Duncan's ejection was CLEARLY the reason the Spurs lost yesterday and, therefore, I place blame for that loss SOLELY at the feet of Joey Crawford.

[peskypesky]

There have been far too many games this season in which the Spurs shooters haven't been able to knock down important shots to convince me that Duncan's ejection was the biggest cause (or even a significant cause) of the loss yesterday.

I'm convinced you're a moron (or a Mavs fan). Then again, those are not mutually exclusive categories.

[cheguevara]

Sure. But when he opens up shooters, they still have to make shots. It's not as if the guys who took shots in the last half of the 4th quarter didn't have good looks at the basket. The looks that they got they didn't knock down. There have been far too many games this season in which the Spurs shooters haven't been able to knock down important shots to convince me that Duncan's ejection was the biggest cause (or even a significant cause) of the loss yesterday.

wow.

have you ever played basketball? you do know that it's way easier to make an open shot than a contested shot?

did you see Barry open when he attempted those shots? do you think it's a coincidence that our shooters were contested and Duncan was out???? :bang :bang

[FromWayDowntown]

Are you retarded? It's a team sport, they don't play in a vacuum. If Duncan is on the floor then maybe HE gets some of those shots and the "wayward shooters" don't. Or maybe the Mavs have to pay more defensive attention to Tim and Manu, Tony and the rest get easier looks.

Plus, with Tim back there on defense, maybe the Mavs don't even score enough points to come back. How obtuse are you?

The Spurs defense wasn't the problem in the 4th quarter. I'm not sure it would have been substantially better from a results standpoint with Duncan on the floor.

Ultimately, I just don't buy the notion that an official caused a team to lose.

[peskypesky]

You're right -- Duncan's ejection was CLEARLY the reason the Spurs lost yesterday and, therefore, I place blame for that loss SOLELY at the feet of Joey Crawford.

Did someone just b-tch-slap some sense into you?

[mardigan]

You're right -- Duncan's ejection was CLEARLY the reason the Spurs lost yesterday and, therefore, I place blame for that loss SOLELY at the feet of Joey Crawford.
How do you think that Tim getting ejected didnt play a huge part of the Mavs winning that game? Yea, maybe we still lose with him, but we have a hell of a better chance with him

[FromWayDowntown]

I'm convinced you're a moron (or a Mavs fan). Then again, those are not mutually exclusive categories.

Insult me if you wish. I think it's a lame cop-out to blame losses on officials. Perhaps that's where we differ.

[FromWayDowntown]

Did someone just b-tch-slap some sense into you?

Yep. In fact, I'll never disagree with you about anything ever again.

[cheguevara]

Ultimately, I just don't buy the notion that an official caused a team to lose.

man you must be new to sports.

you are saying officials haven't ever made mistakes that cost teams a game?

[peskypesky]

Insult me if you wish. I think it's a lame cop-out to blame losses on officials. Perhaps that's where we differ.

I guess the bitch-slap wore off. I guess it was too much to hope that it could raise your IQ for any length of time...

So, now that you've convinced yourself that Tim Duncan's absence was not a major factor in the loss, are you going to try to convince us that the Suns don't require Nash to win games?

[FromWayDowntown]

man you must be new to sports.

you are saying officials haven't ever made mistakes that cost teams a game?

I'm saying that officials make mistakes, but that those mistakes aren't what cost teams games. There are too many other things that go into winning or losing a game that don't have anything to do with officiating. Make more shots, get more rebounds, don't miss free throws, don't commit turnovers.

The Spurs had plenty of opportunities to do the things that they needed to do yesterday to win. Joey Crawford was out of line in the way that he handled the Duncan situation, but in the light of the next day, I don't think that Joey can be said to have cost the Spurs the game. The Spurs cost themselves the game.

[peskypesky]

Duncan's ejection was a major contributing factor in the Spurs' loss.

[Supergirl]

Crawford was directly responsible for the Spurs loss yesterday. fact.

Can't be, because I jumped into following the game online in the middle of the fourth, knew nothing about the T's, and still saw the Spurs with every opportunity to win the game. Certainly TD's absence made it a lot harder, but I think it should worry the Mavs a LOT to know that even without him in the 4th quarter we almost won. We were one Barry 3 away from winning.

(I did, however, notice TD's absence, but wondered if Pop was resting him or something. I also wondering why Dirk and Stackhouse were even in the game)

Crawford should be banned from reffing in this year's playoffs, IMO. That would lose him enough pay to make it hurt, presuming they're paid per game and send a message that refs have to do their job impartially, which obviously last night he did not.

That being said, the Spurs need to put this behind them and focus. Games are not won or lost because of the refs.

[timvp]

Crawford's call last year when he fouled out Tim because Dirk stepped on his foot was a worse call than throwing Tim out for laughing. Why that call isn't brought up more after this incident is beyond my comprehension.

[leemajors]

rofl at ppl trying to call fwd a moron for being reasonable. the spurs were still in the game and leading until very late. they still could have won if they knocked down a few shots.

[SBGamesCone]

You would think that's obvious, but to some lame-brains, the Spurs are just as good without Duncan as they are with him.

I agreed with you up until this retarded point. Remember back a few seasons when Duncan was out a good chunk of the season? I remember thinking we were doomed, but the boys in black stepped it up and went on a run that would make any fan proud.

The Spurs aren't as good without Tim as they are without him, but I'd never go so far as to say we aren't contenders with him riding the pine. Tim is not the whole team and to believe that undermines the skills of everyone else on the team. Likewise it implies that we are totally screwed when he starts to get too old to play.

[Phenomanul]

Crawford's call last year when he fouled out Tim because Dirk stepped on his foot was a worse call than throwing Tim out for laughing. Why that call isn't brought up more after this incident is beyond my comprehension.


Or the one (in the same game) where Dampier shoved Duncan into Dirk (with a forearm and the opposite hand) so that Duncan would get called for a foul.

[Phenomanul]

I agreed with you up until this retarded point. Remember back a few seasons when Duncan was out a good chunk of the season? I remember thinking we were doomed, but the boys in black stepped it up and went on a run that would make any fan proud.

The Spurs aren't as good without Tim as they are without him, but I'd never go so far as to say we aren't contenders with him riding the pine. Tim is not the whole team and to believe that undermines the skills of everyone else on the team. Likewise it implies that we are totally screwed when he starts to get too old to play.

It also depends on the level of competition... and when you factor that into the equation... one could say with a pretty good certainty that the Spurs can't beat the Mavs without Duncan on the floor.

Besides people seem to forget that in that particular game the game plan was geared through Duncan... What, he had like 6 assists up to that point? He could have ended up with a triple double. Our strategy was completely foiled when he was thrown out. And everyone and their momma knows that Pop isn't good with adjustments on the fly.

[nkdlunch]

rofl at ppl trying to call fwd a moron for being reasonable. the spurs were still in the game and leading until very late. they still could have won if they knocked down a few shots.

they had trouble knocking down the shots because they were contested. they were contested because Mav defense did not have Tim to worry about. I am surprised ppl are having trouble comprehending this logic.

[peskypesky]

I agreed with you up until this retarded point. Remember back a few seasons when Duncan was out a good chunk of the season? I remember thinking we were doomed, but the boys in black stepped it up and went on a run that would make any fan proud.

The Spurs aren't as good without Tim as they are without him, but I'd never go so far as to say we aren't contenders with him riding the pine. Tim is not the whole team and to believe that undermines the skills of everyone else on the team. Likewise it implies that we are totally screwed when he starts to get too old to play.

Duncan's ejection was a major contributing factor in the Spurs' loss.

[peskypesky]

they had trouble knocking down the shots because they were contested. they were contested because Mav defense did not have Tim to worry about. I am surprised ppl are having trouble comprehending this logic.

Don't be surprised. Idiots have always existed, and probably always will.

[SBGamesCone]

Duncan's ejection was a major contributing factor in the Spurs' loss.

I am not arguing that. I was as pissed as the rest of us, but essentially saying the spurs are nothing without him is just not true. If it were, Tim would play the entire game or we'd fall apart while he was resting.

[peskypesky]

I agreed with you up until this retarded point. Remember back a few seasons when Duncan was out a good chunk of the season? I remember thinking we were doomed, but the boys in black stepped it up and went on a run that would make any fan proud.

The Spurs aren't as good without Tim as they are without him, but I'd never go so far as to say we aren't contenders with him riding the pine. Tim is not the whole team and to believe that undermines the skills of everyone else on the team. Likewise it implies that we are totally screwed when he starts to get too old to play.

How many times have the Spurs been in the Finals? Three times.
Who were the MVPs in those three Finals? Tim Duncan.

You're a complete moron if you think Tim isn't crucial to our chances of winning it all....

[aaronstampler]

Crawford's call last year when he fouled out Tim because Dirk stepped on his foot was a worse call than throwing Tim out for laughing. Why that call isn't brought up more after this incident is beyond my comprehension.


That was one of about ten calls they made in Games 3 and 4 that were terrible and gave the Mavs a 3-1 lead. Don't forget, in Game 3 Dirk scored 27 points on 3 FGs. He was 21-24 from the line. Just about every point they scored in the 4th quarter that game was from the line.

And Mavs fans have the nerve to complain about Wade.

In game 4 they fouled out Manu by having Terry jump backwards into him when Ginobili was on fire that game. And when we had a 2 point lead late, they let Dirk tie it from the line without even having to draw a foul. Bowen literally just stood still and they whistled him.

Those two games were a bigger joke than any thing that happened in the finals. For all the BS controversy about the "phantom foul" on Dirk against D-Wade, there is photographic evidence that he fouled him. But Mavs fans (and their owner) don't want to hear that.

[Holt's Cat]

Likely Crawford won't ref any Spurs playoff game and the Spurs will get the Bavetta & Salvatore duo for the entire WCF.

[ShoogarBear]

Crawford's call last year when he fouled out Tim because Dirk stepped on his foot was a worse call than throwing Tim out for laughing. Why that call isn't brought up more after this incident is beyond my comprehension.Have we confirmed this was Crawford? Somebody said in another thread it was Bavetta. To be honest, the only thing I remember from that game is seething rage.

[nkdlunch]

Have we confirmed this was Crawford? Somebody said in another thread it was Bavetta. To be honest, the only thing I remember from that game is seething rage.

that was Crawford

[ShoogarBear]

rofl at ppl trying to call fwd a moron for being reasonable. the spurs were still in the game and leading until very late. they still could have won if they knocked down a few shots.Absolutely true. The Mavs were primed to blow the game if just one person would have stepped up.

[FromWayDowntown]

Have we confirmed this was Crawford? Somebody said in another thread it was Bavetta. To be honest, the only thing I remember from that game is seething rage.

Yeah, it was Crawford. Bavetta wasn't there that night. The crew was Crawford, Derosa, and Spooner.

[ShoogarBear]

:lol I'm pretty sure I actually started a thread right after that happened . . .

. . . but I can't search for it now! :madrun

[temujin]

Anyone believing that Refs CANNOT decide who wins a game closer than 20 points,
has never played basketball.

Anyone claiming that playing without one of the top 5 NBA players over the last 10 years,
the entire last quarter,
against a very good team,
on the road,
is NOT a factor in determining a loss
has no clues whatsoever about any TEAM sports.

If this Crawfoerd chap officiates any game in the playoffs,
I'll place a good bet on Dallas to win it all.