something ive noticed in this years playoffs

[stretch]

i know there has always been a little truth to this, but this year, it seems almost completely one sided, in that the home teams have gotten ALL the calls. i think that has been a big reason, especially in this second round, that there have been so few road wins. ive never seen games get called so in favor of the home team in such a widespread manner. i know quite a few other people have noticed this too and have made mention of it.

thoughts?

[Obstructed_View]

The inability of teams to make baskets or good decisions away from their home gym makes a bigger difference IMO.

[stretch]

The inability of teams to make baskets or good decisions away from their home gym makes a bigger difference IMO.

I never said that had nothing to do with road losses.

[Obstructed_View]

I never said that had nothing to do with road losses.

I'm sorry, I thought you said you wanted thoughts. I didn't realize you just wanted to argue with someone that provided them. Enjoy your empty thread.

[Cry Havoc]

i know there has always been a little truth to this, but this year, it seems almost completely one sided, in that the home teams have gotten ALL the calls. i think that has been a big reason, especially in this second round, that there have been so few road wins. ive never seen games get called so in favor of the home team in such a widespread manner. i know quite a few other people have noticed this too and have made mention of it.

thoughts?

Yep.

Refs are breaking the rhythm of the visiting team by calling touch fouls anytime they try to play defense.

This allows the home team to get a set shot with a higher percentage, which leads to fewer transition opportunities for the away team, which also has to play against a much more physical style of defense than they are allowed. Not only that, but the fouls give the home team longer possessions and more time to find an open jumper. This is partly the reason for the 3 point shooting discrepancies.

The last three games between the Spurs and Hornets have been decided by over 60 points. Ridiculous. There is no way HCA is that big of an advantage.

[stretch]

I'm sorry, I thought you said you wanted thoughts. I didn't realize you just wanted to argue with someone that provided them. Enjoy your empty thread.

No I wanted thoughts that had more to do if anyone noticed the same pattern of officiating. Not why teams were losing games. Why would I want a thread where people state the obvious reasons why any team in any sport loses games? Thanks for restating what everyone already knows and adding to the emptiness of this thread, stupidfuck.

[stretch]

Yep.

Refs are breaking the rhythm of the visiting team by calling touch fouls anytime they try to play defense.

This allows the home team to get a set shot with a higher percentage, which leads to fewer transition opportunities for the away team, which also has to play against a much more physical style of defense than they are allowed. Not only that, but the fouls give the home team longer possessions and more time to find an open jumper. This is partly the reason for the 3 point shooting discrepancies.

The last three games between the Spurs and Hornets have been decided by over 60 points. Ridiculous. There is no way HCA is that big of an advantage.

Agreed.

Which is sorta sometimes why I don't understand why people say the refs had nothing to do with Dallas' stagnant play in the Finals against Miami. Now I don't like blaming refs, but for people to say that those calls did not effect how Dallas played on the offensive end of the floor (which IMO is where they lost the series at, not defense) is ignorant.

[Cry Havoc]

Agreed.

Which is sorta sometimes why I don't understand why people say the refs had nothing to do with Dallas' stagnant play in the Finals against Miami. Now I don't like blaming refs, but for people to say that those calls did not effect how Dallas played on the offensive end of the floor (which IMO is where they lost the series at, not defense) is ignorant.

The only reason Spurs fans aren't totally upset for the Mavs over the Finals is because Spurs fans were extremely pissed about the questionable officiating in Games 3 and 4.

[TDfan2007]

Agreed.

Which is sorta sometimes why I don't understand why people say the refs had nothing to do with Dallas' stagnant play in the Finals against Miami. Now I don't like blaming refs, but for people to say that those calls did not effect how Dallas played on the offensive end of the floor (which IMO is where they lost the series at, not defense) is ignorant.

Yeah I think a lot of people are starting to catch onto this, and it is very strange. The refs aren't really supposed to give the home team all the calls like the old HCA myth says they will, but this playoffs they have. One exception was game 6 between the Spurs and Hornets last night. I can only think of one poor call in that game and that was the ridiculous foul call on West when he was just setting a screen that Manu tried to get around. But then again, Horry got called for a similar foul ONLY because West was already hurt and fell to the floor. But yeah, for the most part the officiating has been REALLY one-sided at home. No more apparent than the Lakers-Jazz series.

[TDfan2007]

Agreed.

Which is sorta sometimes why I don't understand why people say the refs had nothing to do with Dallas' stagnant play in the Finals against Miami. Now I don't like blaming refs, but for people to say that those calls did not effect how Dallas played on the offensive end of the floor (which IMO is where they lost the series at, not defense) is ignorant.

The same could be said about the Spurs-Mavs series in 06. Sometimes I wonder how these refs get paid...

[stretch]

The only reason Spurs fans aren't totally upset for the Mavs over the Finals is because Spurs fans were extremely pissed about the questionable officiating in Games 3 and 4.

Yea, just like Mavs fans were extremely pissed about questionable officiating in games 1 and 5.

[ambchang]

I have been trying to figure out why the league would want this, especially when good officiating is marked by consistency. Perhaps the league realized that:

a) Competitiveness sells tickets - Very few people are willing to pay big bucks for games that they know the players don't care about.

b) Regular season goes 82 games for 30 teams, that is 1230 games in total. Compared to the maximum of 105 games in the playoffs (8 7-game series in the first round, 4 in the 2nd, 2 in the CF, and 1 in the Finals), even factoring in concessions, TV revenues, apparel sales and all that crap, playoffs is but a small % of overall league revenues, comparatively.

c) Put the two together, when it is pretty much known that the 00-02 Lakers and the Spurs of late has treated the regular season as pretty much extended practice sessions, and other teams openly jockeying for matchups in the playoffs by throwing regular season games, the undermining of the importance of the regular season would lead to weaker revenue streams for the league in the long term.

This is not a conspiracy theory, but it does make more sense that teams who worked hard during the regular season to get high playoff seedings would have some tangible rewards.

[scampers]

Game 7s=$$$

Not that I'm totally sold on the conspiracy theory. But yeah.

[boutons_]

Two WC elimination games tonight, making 3 when added to last night's game.

Who will, if anybody, be eliminated tonight?

[Cry Havoc]

Game 7s=$$$

Not that I'm totally sold on the conspiracy theory. But yeah.

Home teams are now 20-1 in the 2nd round.

[Bob Lanier]

When refs aren't shaving points, they call the game much less evenly.

[miss paxton]

Game 7s=$$$

Not that I'm totally sold on the conspiracy theory. But yeah.

Besides the obvious money to be made on longer series, I suppose you could also argue that series that go 7 raise more interest from the casual fan. People will tune in if there's suspense to the outcome--are more people watching the Jazz/Lakers than LA/Denver because there's some uncertainty to the outcome (I haven't checked the ratings)? Those people might stick around for the next series, might end up becoming fans of one of the teams and spending money on tickets, jerseys, etc. So if there's a conspiracy theory to stretch series out, that might be another reason.

The Spurs series is puzzling because the margins of victory are so out of whack; the series overall is suspenseful, but each individual game has not been. In the LA/Utah series, three games have been decided by fewer than 10 points, which is obviously more dramatic than the double digit blowouts that have characterized SA/NO. Even Cleveland/Boston has had two games decided by fewer than 10 points, although the other three were decided by 11, 16 and 24. And how does Detroit/Orlando fit in? Why would the league "allow" Detroit to win in 5 if the purpose is to make the series as long as possible--to deflect attention? To be able to point to one series (arguably the least glamorous one) and say, "see, this proves we're not fixing anything."

I don't know, but it's an interesting topic for a slow Friday afternoon.

[duncan228]

I posted this in the Spurs forum but it seems like it belongs here.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...oad/index.html

Road to nowhere in NBA playoffs
by Steve Aschburner
Story Highlights
The home team has dominated the second round of the playoffs
Teams with home-court edge win 75 percent of best-of-seven series
The Celtics could secure an NBA title just by winning their home games

After beating down for most of its existence one hackneyed claim -- Catch the last two minutes of a pro basketball game and you'll see everything you need -- the NBA lately finds itself faced with another that is mixed, poured and already setting up concrete-style right here in the 2008 playoffs:

Check the schedule to see which team is playing at home, and you'll already know who's going to win.

NBA road teams have about as much chance at victory this postseason as traveling parties to King Kong's Skull Island. Twenty of the 21 games played so far in the second round have been won by the home teams. That's 95.2 percent, a success rate that would put a scare into even the greatest road team of all time, the Harlem Globetrotters. In the first round, home teams went 30-14, a .682 clip. That makes it 50 out of 65 overall, or a 76.9 percent chance of sending the fans in attendance home happy while inevitably wringing some of the drama out of what ought to be the best basketball of the year.

Consider the Game 6 clashes Friday night in Cleveland and Utah. With one team in each poised to clinch and advance, and the other fighting for its playoff life, the tension and excitement in the sixth game of any best-of-seven series traditionally rival that found in most Game 7 showdowns. Except that the way the Celtics, in particular, and the Lakers have fared on the road in this round, it seems pretty safe -- for those following along via telecasts -- to skip the first game entirely and, east of the Rocky Mountains, head off to bed at halftime of the nightcap.

We'll be able to do it all over Sunday or Monday, same teams, other guys' buildings.

"If I could figure out what's going on with this home-court stuff, I would bottle it and sell it to the other 29 teams in the league," Hornets coach Byron Scott said after his team's Game 6 loss in San Antonio on Thursday.

After Boston -- 7-0 at home in these playoffs, 0-5 on the road -- beat the Cavaliers in Game 5 on Wednesday, Celtics coach Doc Rivers said: "We're going to get one. I don't know when. It would be great if it's Game 6, but if not, we're going to come back here.''

If not, we're going to come back here. Hmm. Let's just say there have been more fervent rallying cries in sports history.

Home-court advantage is a staple of the NBA game, evident during most regular seasons and significant in most postseasons. Conventional wisdom says that home teams generally win about 60 percent of the time; in 2007-08, that's almost precisely how the home/road continuum played out. In the East, the teams in white were 344-271 this season. In the West, 395-220. Combined, that's 739-491, a winning percentage of .601. Flip that and you get the road team's .399. NBA head coaches even have a counting system to capture the impact during the year, scoring road victories as plus-1 and home defeats as minus-1 to see where they really stand.

In the playoffs, when the buildings get more crowded and more noisy, the home team's fortunes typically improve. Since the NBA went to a 16-team tournament in 1984, home teams have won 66.4 percent of the games. Interestingly, the advantage has been most pronounced in the second round, with a 67.9 percent success rate.

It also is understood that home-court advantage pays off, way more often than not, when it comes to advancing. According to NBA figures, over all of the league's best-of-seven playoff matchups, the teams with the home-court edge have won 280 out of 372 series, a .753 rate.

Still, it never has been taken so literally, with home teams winning and road teams losing quite like this. The most lopsided home/road results in any round since 1984, overall by winning percentage, came in the 1990 conference finals, when the home teams went 12-1 (.923). That postseason, the home clubs won 75 percent of the time.

So what is it this year? Statistical anomaly? An identifiable trend? An influx of wimpy players and coaches? Friendlier officiating at home? A new definition of "traveling violation?'' Probably some combination of the above (though the refs will deny their part).

"It takes a different mental approach to win on the road,'' Raptors coach Sam Mitchell said by telephone Thursday. "You've almost got to like going on the road. You've almost got to like staying in a hotel, flying to those other cities, playing in the other teams' arenas. You've got to like getting out of your comfort zone -- and most players today, most people, don't like getting out of their comfort zones.''

Mitchell talked about great players such as Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Isiah Thomas "embracing'' the challenge of spoiling a home crowd's night by beating its favorite team. But then, we see those Hall of Famers in hindsight, their accomplishments done, their reputations secure, their legends growing. Snap back to now.

"We've got so many young stars in this league right now,'' Mitchell said. "They're still learning how to win on the road. It's not a physical thing. It's not the different arenas. It's just the whole thing of going on the road and feeling like you can win. That's what you get from a veteran team.

"If the Spurs win in San Antonio,'' he said before the Spurs did just that Thursday night, "you've got to think they'll feel like they can win Game 7 in New Orleans.''

But, but, but ... that savvy crew of Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Gregg Popovich has been just as susceptible to road woes as anyone lately.

"Well, then it's a mystery,'' Mitchell said.

Fred Hoiberg, assistant general manager of the Timberwolves, was on Indiana and Minnesota teams that went deep into the playoffs and had other thoughts on the trend.

"When you have a sellout crowd, the noise ... and I think the noisemakers are louder in our game, the P.A. systems, the music and all that,'' Hoiberg said. "The veteran teams can usually stop the bleeding, while younger teams have more trouble with it. But right now, you're seeing all the teams -- San Antonio is as veteran a group of guys as you have, winning NBA championships, and you saw how New Orleans' home court affected them the other night.

"It's such an emotional game. When the crowd gets into it, it can really swing momentum. When they got it going in the third quarter in New Orleans the other night, it seemed to give that team confidence. The crowd got into it and San Antonio had a heck of a time just scoring a basket.''

One theory mentioned lately is that the evenness of teams, in quality and competitiveness, has allowed home-court advantage to define more series. Since there aren't one or two dominant teams kicking butt on whatever court they take, intangibles like this can play, and are playing, a bigger role.

Again, that's just a theory. And again, it might not really matter, once one team or another packs the Larry O'Brien trophy away for the summer. So what if they don't have to stuff it in their carry-on luggage?

"People talk about how Boston has struggled on the road, but they've earned the right,'' Hoiberg said. "As long as they continue to play well at home, they're going to win a championship. That's what it comes down to. That's what the regular season was for them. If they protect their home court, they're going to win the whole thing.''

Won't they take a lot of grief in the meantime, though? C'mon, a 16-12 championship record?

"Who cares?'' the Wolves' exec said. "Anyway, I think it would take them winning just one game on the road to give them confidence they can do it. They won, what, 75 percent of their road games during the year?''

That is the potential silver lining in this, of course. If home-court advantage continues to mean more and more in the NBA playoffs, it might crank up the value teams place on securing it, bringing heightened intensity to those doggy January and February games across the league.

[balli]

Enjoy your empty thread.

His thread doesn't look empty to me, you stupid fuck.


To address the topic at hand: I don't normally complain about refs or buy into conspiracy, but after UT/LA game 5, I'm convinced David Stern is personally orchestrating the outcome of that series. I don't think it was just referee bias due to the home crowd. (Although Utah will never win a game in which Javey and Delaney are reffing.) I do think it is a full on league/Stern sanctioned conspiracy against us. Okur did flop on that last play the other night and I take no umbrage with that particular non-call, but besides that it may have been one of the most lopsided and terribly officiated games in recent memory. Shit's rigged.

[rAm]

His thread doesn't look empty to me, you stupid fuck.


To address the topic at hand: I don't normally complain about refs or buy into conspiracy, but after UT/LA game 5, I'm convinced David Stern is personally orchestrating the outcome of that series. I don't think it was just referee bias due to the home crowd. (Although Utah will never win a game in which Javey and Delaney are reffing.) I do think it is a full on league/Stern sanctioned conspiracy against us. Okur did flop on that last play the other night and I take no umbrage with that particular non-call, but besides that it may have been one of the most lopsided and terribly officiated games in recent memory. Shit's rigged.

The calls were pretty bad in that game, I would agree.

Its kind of embarrassing how one sides the calls are during each home game. It makes for shitty basketball because on one hand you don't feel like you have earned the victory and on the other hand you are frustrated as shit whenever your team plays on the road.

[Geezerballer]

You would think if the HCA was due to the crowd noise/enthusiasm it would show up a whole lot more in college games.

I’m just sayin….

[rAm]

You would think if the HCA was due to the crowd noise/enthusiasm it would show up a whole lot more in college games.

I’m just sayin….

it does

[ElNono]

I dislike blaming the refs, because I think that's an excuse to overlook what your team did wrong, but this 2nd round is really baffling.
I mean, I know refs like Bavetta are big home cookers, but at this point it's getting ridiculous. And the *actual* reason you see blowouts in the SA/NO series is home cooking from the refs. There's no other reason. I think Pop tried to counter that with that T early in Game 5, but it didn't work. I also don't think there's any mandate from the higher ups. I just thinks players sense they can get away with more shit at home and just take advantage.

[rep]

What has Utah really proved? Pau Gasol hasn't played many meaningful games through out his career, particularly with Kobe. Celtics big 3 finally playing big games...

Point is, weak minded teams or teams yet to fully adjust to the big game atmosphere with one another can play a part as to why teams can't win on the road. SA/NO, sorry can't figure that one out and ORL/Detroit... seems fitting that Detroit, a team with an extra years worth of playoff games together would get that loan road victory even with Chauncey out.

From watching these games, I've never felt like officiating was THAT bad. Honestly I've been critical of officiating since '05. Maybe I'm just used to the bad calls or maybe everything is finally falling into place for Mr.Stern and he no longer has to use shady officiating for a bigger fan base/more money.

[balli]

From watching these games, I've never felt like officiating was THAT bad.

Look again then. LA/UT and SA/NO game 5's featured about as unprofessional and lopsided reffing that I've ever seen. I don't know why Joey Crawford was working a spurs game in the first place, but his hatred for them was clearly on display (and this is coming from a die-hard Spurs hater). And in the Utah game, well, it was so bad that I'm buying into conspiracy... and I never believe that shit. At least til now.

[manufor3]

When refs aren't shaving points, they call the game much less evenly.

okay your avatar creeps me out