LJ and Kori. why do so many spurs fans think the league is fixed?

[timvp]

David Stern told me to decline comment.

Sorry.

[Kori Ellis]

LJ and Kori. why do so many spurs fans think the league is fixed?

I'm not sure that I've ever met a Spurs fan that actually believed the league was fixed. If the league was fixed, why would you guys watch? Wouldn't it be equivalent to watching wrestling?

The only people I hear talking about fixing seriously are people that think black helicopters are circling their house and that OnStar and dog microchips are really the government following their following their every move.

Does the officiating suck sometimes? Sure...but usually both ways.
Do "stars" get some calls? Of course.
But fixing? That's a whole different thing.

[vander]

The NBA is not fixed.

And I will associate myself with whomever I wish... Spurfan, Mavfan, Sunfan, Lakerfan, etc. Thankyou.

OK. but Stern sure as isn't going to veto any lop-sided trade between the haves and the have-nots. just so you'll admit that much.

Seriously, don't confuse me with a hater, I like the system.

[Allanon]

OK. but Stern sure as isn't going to veto any lop-sided trade between the haves and the have-nots. just so you'll admit that much.

Seriously, don't confuse me with a hater, I like the system.

I do think that teams with good relationships with other teams are more likely to do "favorable trades". Especially when the staff at one place finds himself in a key role at another organization. They may be the first team to be called or given first rights to an available player.

[NFGIII]

I don't believe that it is fixed, either. As Kori stated there are bad calls and the stars do get special treatment. If it were truly fixed and has been for many years then someone would have already blown the whistle. There would have to be way too many people involved for it to work and have been kept under wraps. So many people involved would ultimately guarantee it's exposure.

But Stern's greatest hard on would be a LA vs. NY final every year. In other words it would pit the top two TV markets against one another.

And we all know what that means -

Rumor has it Stern was treated for frostbite right after the 1985 NBA draft though.

[lefty]

A few other notable mentions, just in the past decade....

L.A. Vs Kings 2002 (this should explain itself)

Spurs vs L.A. 2004 (The .4 shot which at the time was deemed by NBA rule impossible but was still allowed, the rule was changed immediately in the new season)

Spurs Vs Dallas 2006 (Dirk was ushered to the line way to much for a jumpshooter)

Dallas Vs Heat 2006 (Wade was ushered to the line way to much for throwing his body into defenders and flopping)

Spurs vs Suns 2007 (The suspensions, while correct, should have been looked at in context, nothing happened but yet the Suns where severely punished (never say the Spurs dont get breaks from Stern))

Spurs vs L.A. 2008 (the non-call on Fisher, not that I think it would have mattered much, but still.)

I disagree

If the NBA didn't suspend Amare and Diaw, it would have been unfair to the players who were suspended after the Heat-Knicks beawl in the 1997 playoffs

Rules are the rules

[Rogue]

the game's process isn't exactly directed but the results are roughly manifested the same way as WWE. NBA just manages to conceal it better.

[spurastic]

Don't think it's "fixed", but manipulated and controlled to the degree possible within the fine line of the law (probably) by Stern and co. Also think that refs are influenced by all those human emotions such as (likes/dislikes of a particular player, being on the rag, etc., and by what they perceive that the boss and popular opinion wants (eg superstars being promoted, size of fan base, etc..) ....and of course there are some of those refs that are not competent. Refs seem unable to call the game the same on both ends. Also have to suspect that if the NBA is "losing $" that it will influence actions (rather deliberate or not). Just my opinion.

[Vici]

I'll bite.

I am one of those who believes the game is "fixed". Fixed though is a rather poor word for it but this is what I believe:

The NBA has an interest to give certain players/ cities better success. That is rather obvious since the NBA is a business first. They have to walk a fine line though and not outright fix games. They can’t tell people to make or miss shots, to not play defense otherwise the integrity of the league would be compromised.

However, the league can be more subtle. They are more than capable of giving one team calls late in the game or giving calls to stop another team's momentum.

Here are two observations I have made:
1.) Whenever a team is on a run, say 10-20 points and it looks like it’s not going to stop, the refs will give the losing team a few calls in their favor to see if they can make it back. They will stop the momentum and give the other team a way to claw back. If they fail to turn the tide, the refs will back off and let the route continue. I believe they do this because close games are far more entertaining to more people than a blowout.

2.) If the game is close and about midway through the third quarter, the team the league wants to lose will start to get several calls go their way. This will usually continue early into the fourth quarter. They do this so at the end of the night the calls will look even.

As the game winds down the team they want to win will start getting the benefit of the calls. All of a sudden the team they want to win is encouraged to drive to the basket to make easy shots (and 1s) while the opposing team is discouraged (usually taking jump shots to avoid offensive fouls).

Granted not every game goes on like this, or even most of them. But when the games are premier games, when the game has some sort of meaning this seems to happen.

Proof of this has already been stated but I will state it again.

2004 Fisher's shot - Fantastic shot by any standard, however the rule book was very clear that it is physically impossible to catch and shoot a ball in 0.59 seconds or less. This was ironically made clear to all Spurs fans earlier in the year when Bruce Bowen hit a half court shot in 0.5 seconds (before the clock hit 0) but was taken away because it was not physically possible to catch and shoot. They claimed it only didn't hit 0 because of human error.

So why did the league allow Fisher's shot? Had it been the Spurs who had made that show would the league have allowed it? Who knows, but I know they didn't earlier in the season. That doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't in the playoffs but it's just another example of the Laker's receiving favorable calls.

There are most examples but I’m willing to bet that most who started reading this haven’t made it this far.

Why then did the Spurs win 4 championships?

The League can not stop a team from making shots or enduring bad calls. A mentally tough team is what it takes to win the championship these days, unless you're Boston or the Lakers ( even the Knicks if they would stop tripping over themselves).

Why do I watch the game?

I really don't anymore. I'm from San Antonio and grew up watching the Admiral and the Ninja. Almost every night I'd watch the games with family or friends so the Spurs are as much a part of me as San Antonio. I'll catch a game here or there but unless it's the Spurs the NBA is unbearable to watch.

I can never understand how a league can so blatantly have calls for certain people and not for others (all star treatment). If they would just treat all players the same then the NBA would offer a much better product. I know many people who want to watch the NBA but feel the same way I do.

[Allanon]

It is one sided to believe the Spurs were the only ones who won honestly...while the Celtics, Lakers and Pistons won dishonestly.

As far as favoritism towards the big markets; only the Lakers have been consistently successful.

The results don't support the "Big Market" theory.

1. Knicks are still an embarrassment
2a. Lakers are successful but last #1 pick was 30 years ago.
2b. Clippers are the worst NBA franchise ever
3. Bulls have been crappy/mediocre for more than a decade
4. Sixers suck
5. Mavs have never won a championship
6. Warriors have been rebuilding since forever
7. Celtics were an embarrassment for 20 years
8. Hawks are decent
9. Wizards are better known as the Bullets
10. Rockets are headed for the lottery

Meanwhile:
37. Spurs own 4 les in the last 11 years

[raspsa]

I agree with Kori .. why do so many people who think the league is fixed watch the games? Surely, they can find better use for their time.

[Vici]

It is one sided to believe the Spurs were the only ones who won honestly...while the Celtics, Lakers and Pistons won dishonestly.

As far as favoritism towards the big markets; only the Lakers have been consistently successful.

The results don't support the "Big Market" theory.

1. Knicks are still an embarrassment
2. Lakers are successful but last #1 pick was 30 years ago.
3. Bulls have been crappy/mediocre for more than a decade
4. Sixers suck
5. Mavs have never won a championship
6. Warriors have been rebuilding since forever
7. Celtics were an embarrassment for 20 years
8. Hawks are decent
9. Wizards are better known as the Bullets
10. Rockets are headed for the lottery

Meanwhile:
37. Spurs own 4 les in the last 11 years

Who said the Pistons didn't win it honestly? Or that all those teams had to be successful at the same time?

[Allanon]

Who said the Pistons didn't win it honestly? Or that all those teams had to be successful at the same time?

So in your opinion, which teams won honestly and which ones didn't?

The Big Market theory says that the NBA is rigged towards the Big Market teams...but the Lakers are the only one out of 11 of the top markets that have been consistently successful.

After a 2 year stint, the Celtics are quickly returning back to irrelevancy.

Did Stern just say, let's go Lakers and screw everybody else?

Why would the NBA rig it so only the Lakers come out on top? How does that make any sense?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm not sure that I've ever met a Spurs fan that actually believed the league was fixed. If the league was fixed, why would you guys watch? Wouldn't it be equivalent to watching wrestling?

The only people I hear talking about fixing seriously are people that think black helicopters are circling their house and that OnStar and dog microchips are really the government following their following their every move.

Does the officiating suck sometimes? Sure...but usually both ways.
Do "stars" get some calls? Of course.
But fixing? That's a whole different thing.

A whole different thing? You just admit that the league calls foul different for different players but using the same brain discount the idea that they could do the same for teams.

Fixed is definitely the wrong term because that assumes that the teams and players are in on it but I do not buy that; however they definitely shade it towards particular teams.

The NBA helps certain teams and players be successful through officiating. Be it big market teams, home teams or 'star' its pretty obvious they shade calls their way

[dav4463]

Stern = Vince McMahon ?

[Bigzax]

while i don't believe the 'league' is fixed, i definitely believe that the fix is in with regard to spreads for certain big money games, via mafia in the pockets of certain refs.

same with nfl to be fair.

golden rule is that when you see the surest bet in the world, and everyone else is on the bandwagon...bet the other way.

[PublicOption]

Thanks whitlock......for clearing it up for me.

[dbreiden83080]

The deal is they are nuts.. I have often said if you think the league is fixed why the are you watching???

[KaiRMD1]

A few other notable mentions, just in the past decade....

L.A. Vs Kings 2002 (this should explain itself)

Spurs vs L.A. 2004 (The .4 shot which at the time was deemed by NBA rule impossible but was still allowed, the rule was changed immediately in the new season)

Spurs Vs Dallas 2006 (Dirk was ushered to the line way to much for a jumpshooter)

Dallas Vs Heat 2006 (Wade was ushered to the line way to much for throwing his body into defenders and flopping)

Spurs vs Suns 2007 (The suspensions, while correct, should have been looked at in context, nothing happened but yet the Suns where severely punished (never say the Spurs dont get breaks from Stern))

Spurs vs L.A. 2008 (the non-call on Fisher, not that I think it would have mattered much, but still.)

Does the Donaghy influenced game 3 of the Spurs - Suns 2007 series count?

[Galileo]

Quite frankly game 4 of the 2004 Lakers/TWolves series was all I needed to see to be convinced the league is fixed.

What happened in that series?

[pjjrfan]

It.s not fixed but the refs suck and too many times let personal stuff get in he way

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

People love conspiracy theories because they find it hard to deal with reality - creating a grand conspiracy allows people to "explain" things they can't handle or don't want to deal with.

"The NBA is fixed" is an example of a harmless conspiracy theory, "climate science is fraudulent" is an example of a very harmful conspiracy theory. I don't care about the former very much, but the latter is putting at risk the stability of the biosphere we all rely on, not to mention the fact that it is utterly absurd (a conspiracy involving 2 people is hard enough to pull off - a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of scientists and open-source data sets is completely impossible).

[LakerLanny]

Because of reasons like the fact I already am 99% sure the league will assign their in-house fixers (Ken Mauer and Scott Foster) to tomorrow's game because they have to do everything possible to get the Thunder the win to manufacture drama and stretch out the series.

If the league was run legitimately, the officials would be assigned randomly to playoff games. They aren't.

Anyone who watched the 2004, 2006 and 2008 Finals knows the league is rigged. Let's look at 2004, Lakers get called for jump ball violations on the opening tap in each of the first four games!

This after not having it called one time in the regular season on opening taps.

And there was nothing different on those jump balls than any of the others, it was just a giant You to the Lakers from the league letting them know right from the start of each game they would have no chance of getting a fair shake.

And they didn't.

The NBA will not have any legitimacy until Stern is gone and all his fixer refs are gone with him. Or turn the officiating over to an independent third party organization, but see they won't do that because then they wouldn't be able to influence the outcome of games using corrupt officials.

Watch Mauer and Foster be there tomorrow, I can almost guarantee it.

[ducks]

5 techs on boston tonight
one on ray allen
one on doc for saying come on ed

[phyzik]

A team that is good enough to get a championship is good enough to negate the refs. If there is a conspiracy to rig the games, they can only do so much without making it obvious. If there is a team good enough to transcend that, its this Spurs team.