Lakers shot 19 FTs in 4th quarter, Boston shot 17 for the whole game.

[LakeShow]

I won't take anything away from this game. It was one of the best ever. The Celtics obviously missed Perkins in the end but the Celtics have nothing to be ashamed of. They put up a valiant fight. These two franchises are clearly the best the NBA has to offer.

I am damn proud of these Lakers. Heart of a Champion!

[JamStone]

I won't take anything away from this game. It was one of the best ever. The Celtics obviously missed Perkins in the end but the Celtics have nothing to be ashamed of. They put up a valiant fight. These two franchises are clearly the best the NBA has to offer.

I am damn proud of these Lakers. Heart of a Champion!

Generally game 7s, especially in a championship round, are going to be good and exciting as long as they aren't a blowout win for either team. There's the drama and suspense and everything is on the line.

But I would absolutely hold off on the "one of the best ever" tags for yesterday's game. Sorry, but that was one of the worst ever game 7s I've seen from purely a quality of basketball point of view. The game was close late in the fourth quarter, so the excitement and drama was there. But neither team brought their A game. There was effort. There was drama. There were players laying it all on the line. But that was not a good game. A lot of people are giving way too much credit to the defense by both teams. Sure, they played well. But the defense was not that good. Those two teams played an awful, awful brand of basketball last night.

[ballhog]

Big shock. Lakers were down, all of a sudden the Celtics couldn't breathe without causing a foul. Probably happen exactly like this next year.

[LakeShow]

Generally game 7s, especially in a championship round, are going to be good and exciting as long as they aren't a blowout win for either team. There's the drama and suspense and everything is on the line.

But I would absolutely hold off on the "one of the best ever" tags for yesterday's game. Sorry, but that was one of the worst ever game 7s I've seen from purely a quality of basketball point of view. The game was close late in the fourth quarter, so the excitement and drama was there. But neither team brought their A game. There was effort. There was drama. There were players laying it all on the line. But that was not a good game. A lot of people are giving way too much credit to the defense by both teams. Sure, they played well. But the defense was not that good. Those two teams played an awful, awful brand of basketball last night.

Okay, I'll just say the best ever for me. I love everything about that game last night. It doesn't get any better than that for me. I respect your opinion though, to each his own but I loved it.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Rewatched the 4th...

There wasn't one foul that was called that wasn't clearly a foul.

So if you are spew the same ole BS... show me ONE foul that was called on the Celts that they didnt deserve! ONE!

The Lakers were the aggresors and Boston started playing D with their hands and not their feet. WATCH THE GAME!!!!

You miss the point. You can call fouls all the time. All game long there were plays that should have been whistled but were not. All of a sudden they were.

[TheMACHINE]

You miss the point. You can call fouls all the time. All game long there were plays that should have been whistled but were not. All of a sudden they were.

yup obvious fouls...fouls that should have been called. I can say this in all the threads all day.

[jdev82]

ima skip the whole "it was rigged" thing and just take some time out to appreciate sheed wallace, for consistently proving me right in my home all postseason by showing up for every big game. spurs fans, tell me you wouldnt want his CLUTCH shooting and AMAZING defense on pau. one of the all time great post defenders with a completely unique offensive game. lets give big ups to one of the really really good ones (wont say great) who we may not see again. but if that is the last image of sheed wallace, going out like a beast and taking gasol out of the game while contributing aLOT on offense, that is all us sheed fans can ask. GOD BLESS SHEED

[Dr House]

This Lakers team is clearly the best team to ever grace on God's green earth in any sport ever!!!!!!!! ANYONE WHO DENIES THAT SHOULD BE SHOT ON SPOT!!!!!!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

yup obvious fouls...fouls that should have been called. I can say this in all the threads all day.

And you will not make much sense. I have tutored 6th graders that can produce a more lucid argument than you can.

You really are good at trying to mire a discussion into stupidity. Youre a natural.

[TheMACHINE]

And you will not make much sense. I have tutored 6th graders that can produce a more lucid argument than you can.

You really are good at trying to mire a discussion into stupidity. Youre a natural.

are you saying they were not fouls? If not, get some glasses old man.

lol butthurt

[FuzzyLumpkins]

are you saying they were not fouls? If not, get some glasses old man.

lol butthurt

You do not understand discretionary calls and how they work. It is amusing watching you make a jackass out of yourself because of that failure on your part.

Keep going by all means.

[duhoh]

LA's free throws were mostly legit. you cannot say that boston matched the aggression that the lakers showed, while boston's fouls were idiotic plays, like when pierce tried to draw a charge at the circle.

[TheMACHINE]

You do not understand discretionary calls and how they work. It is amusing watching you make a jackass out of yourself because of that failure on your part.

Keep going by all means.

dude..those wernt ticky tack fouls in the 4th. Celtics CLEARELY fouled the Lakers in 95% of those calls. Clear as day.

Get some glasses .

[TheMACHINE]

You do not understand discretionary calls and how they work. It is amusing watching you make a jackass out of yourself because of that failure on your part.

Keep going by all means.

LA's free throws were mostly legit. you cannot say that boston matched the aggression that the lakers showed, while boston's fouls were idiotic plays, like when pierce tried to draw a charge at the circle.

thanks you duhoh.

[JamStone]

You do not understand discretionary calls and how they work. It is amusing watching you make a jackass out of yourself because of that failure on your part.

Keep going by all means.

If your argument is that the referees had the "discretion" to make calls or not make calls, you're essentially admitting they weren't bad calls. Discretionary does not mean wrong or bad. Discretionary doesn't even mean questionable. Discretionary means the calls were justifiable based on referee opinion and interpretation. That's a horrible argument if you're trying to claim the calls were bad or biased or rigged.

[BadOdor]

Was spur fan this mad when leon ing powe outshot the whole lakers team from the free throw stripe in game 2 in 2008?

Don't believe he was...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

dude..those wernt ticky tack fouls in the 4th. Celtics ..............duuuuhh....CLEARELY fouled the Lakers in............duuuhhhh.... 95% of those calls. Clear as day.

Get some..........................duuuuh... glasses .

Three were clear fouls all game long that went uncalled. You really just do not understand how it works.

I do not even know why I am trying to make rational arguments to a mouthbreather like yourself.

A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.

ITs to the point where I can hear the duuuuhh between the phrases you are typing.

[TheMACHINE]

If your argument is that the referees had the "discretion" to make calls or not make calls, you're essentially admitting they weren't bad calls. Discretionary does not mean wrong or bad. Discretionary doesn't even mean questionable. Discretionary means the calls were justifiable based on referee opinion and interpretation. That's a horrible argument if you're trying to claim the calls were bad or biased or rigged.

bam! jamstone up in this ! Go pinoy!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If your argument is that the referees had the "discretion" to make calls or not make calls, you're essentially admitting they weren't bad calls. Discretionary does not mean wrong or bad. Discretionary doesn't even mean questionable. Discretionary means the calls were justifiable based on referee opinion and interpretation. That's a horrible argument if you're trying to claim the calls were bad or biased or rigged.

Its like in baseball when the ump wont call strikes low and over the inside part of the plate even though according to the rules that is a strike. I have no issue with that as long as its consistent. If he changes the way he calls the game and starts calling those strikes thats ed up. If he calls strikes for the other pitcher thats REALLY ed up.

Thats exactly what happened last night. In the game of basketball, pretty much everything is a similar type call. , even travelling which is pretty cut and dry is given that treatment.

The problem in my view is that the NBA uses that as a tool to achieve goals and has been doing so for a very long time. Of course they can sit back and say well according to the rules its a foul and that is true but if that is true then the should have been called for the first 36 minutes.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

bam! jamstone up in this ! Go pinoy!

Now this is sad. The idiot is trying to support a different argument that he still fails to understand.

[TheMACHINE]

The problem in my view is that the NBA uses that as a tool to achieve goals and has been doing so for a very long time. Of course they can sit back and say well according to the rules its a foul and that is true but if that is true then the should have been called for the first 36 minutes.

I agree with you. The refs should have called more fouls on the celtics in the first 36 minutes. Kobe was getting hit left and right in the first 3 quarters.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree with you. The refs should have called more fouls on the celtics in the first 36 minutes. Kobe was getting hit left and right in the first 3 quarters.

Russell was so very right. I quoted him for a reason.

[TheMACHINE]

Russell was so very right. I quoted him for a reason.

lol butthurt...have fun NOT watching the NBA anymore

[JamStone]

Its like in baseball when the ump wont call strikes low and over the inside part of the plate even though according to the rules that is a strike. I have no issue with that as long as its consistent. If he changes the way he calls the game and starts calling those strikes thats ed up. If he calls strikes for the other pitcher thats REALLY ed up.

Thats exactly what happened last night. In the game of basketball, pretty much everything is a similar type call. , even travelling which is pretty cut and dry is given that treatment.

The problem in my view is that the NBA uses that as a tool to achieve goals and has been doing so for a very long time. Of course they can sit back and say well according to the rules its a foul and that is true but if that is true then the should have been called for the first 36 minutes.

You have an issue with human nature then. Fans have for a long time wanted perfect accuracy in professional sports. Controversy like you just stated have been a product of a loose or tight strike zone in major league baseball, spotting the ball in football, foul calls in basketball. That's the human element. Be disgusted all you want, but the games aren't played by robot machines and they aren't officiated by robot machines.

Tough calls are made. Even bad calls are made. That's the nature of the human element. That's why some people are so adamant about instant replay one way or the other. It both aids and attacks the human element. We could just play all these games in computer simulation.

Your problem isn't with the calls in the fourth quarter being wrong. If you go back and watch the fourth quarter, I bet you that almost all of the calls were good calls and very few were even questionable. Your problem is with consistency. Sorry, but it's just too hard. And it's not like it's the same exact official calling every single call. Consistency is tough to accomplish when you have one official, let alone three different officials who see things differently. Watch an entire game, and each official might call things different when it's their call and they see the same exact play. Part of the human element. Part of the game.

The calls were not wrong (again for the most part). They were discretionary. Did they call it tighter in the fourth quarter? Sure. Were they consistent? Nope. In all reality and honesty, they never are, not for any game, playoffs, regular season, whatever. It's a myth to think a crew of three officials can be completely consistent throughout 48 minutes. They simply won't be. You're going to have a handful of calls you argue with no matter what.

If you're honest with yourself, this is just a matter of you deep inside hating seeing a team you despise win. That's my opinion anyway. But I don't blame you. It's only human nature.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You have an issue with human nature then. Fans have for a long time wanted perfect accuracy in professional sports. Controversy like you just stated have been a product of a loose or tight strike zone in major league baseball, spotting the ball in football, foul calls in basketball. That's the human element. Be disgusted all you want, but the games aren't played by robot machines and they aren't officiated by robot machines.

Tough calls are made. Even bad calls are made. That's the nature of the human element. That's why some people are so adamant about instant replay one way or the other. It both aids and attacks the human element. We could just play all these games in computer simulation.

Your problem isn't with the calls in the fourth quarter being wrong. If you go back and watch the fourth quarter, I bet you that almost all of the calls were good calls and very few were even questionable. Your problem is with consistency. Sorry, but it's just too hard. And it's not like it's the same exact official calling every single call. Consistency is tough to accomplish when you have one official, let alone three different officials who see things differently. Watch an entire game, and each official might call things different when it's their call and they see the same exact play. Part of the human element. Part of the game.

The calls were not wrong (again for the most part). They were discretionary. Did they call it tighter in the fourth quarter? Sure. Were they consistent? Nope. In all reality and honesty, they never are, not for any game, playoffs, regular season, whatever. It's a myth to think a crew of three officials can be completely consistent throughout 48 minutes. They simply won't be. You're going to have a handful of calls you argue with no matter what.

If you're honest with yourself, this is just a matter of you deep inside hating seeing a team you despise win. That's my opinion anyway. But I don't blame you. It's only human nature.

Its not human nature. Its completely deliberate.

What do you think superstar treatment is? Do you honestly not think that the refs are told to try not to keep said superstars out of foul trouble.

You look at the way Tony Parker is called and the way a guy like Oberto is and its ing obvious that they call the game differently for different players.

Star treatment is an accepted fact for the NBA. That in and of itself is ed up but what mindboggling is that people will accept superstar treatment without hesitation and then turn around and vehemently deny that they might even do the same ing thing but for a team.

What I see are people that want to like basketball and cannot see whats right in front of their faces lest they have to stop liking it.

Delude yourself if you want to. I choose not to.