ChuckBuck wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

Nalod wrote:Who says we foul him? Who says Rondo does not pass it to his back court mate Ray?

There are many scenarios to point.

Say we do, then we are at the line. Go 1-1, now we up by 2.

Bottom line, they had to hit a 3 to tie. Team is coming back nice and we had momentum.

Celts getting old and we are deep.

Whats to argue? Knicks lost. MDA haters can come out again.

MDA Haters?

MDA Defenders seem to think this was wrong as well. Objectivity can be seen by "SOME" defenders as well.

Has nothing to do with hate. Even Nixluva on the game thread (D'Antoni's staunchest supporter) called him out as well:

Nixluva - IMO none of this other crap matters. This team was up 3 with only seconds to play. You have to close that game out!!! You have to run the C's off the 3pt line!!! Dble everything out at the 3pt line and who cares if they hit a 2pt shot? Up 3 With time running down we have been hurt by the 3 ball and it's something this team has to do a better job defending.
The slow 3rd qtr bug also bit us again. This team has to get the starters to play with much more energy cuz they seem to play slow and it allows teams to go off in the 3rd qtr of games. MDA has to find a way to fix these issues. I blame MDA for this loss more than the players.

Haha - thats what I was referring to. I was so proud of Nix. Nalod will have his anti MDA moment. I know its coming

ChuckBuck wrote:
Somebody should've tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court.

yeah that wouldve been smart so that that way they wouldve gotten 2 free throws and possession for a dead ball foul & potentially go up by 1 or 2 points....Brilliant coaching

PS - they also could have called the hand check by Pierce on Melo on the final play of regulation but im willing to forgive that one because they weren't calling it all game

Nalod wrote:
Oh, so NOW Nix validates any anti MDA?

Haters will look anywhere for support!

Im not defending MDA BTW, just calling out Monday morning (Literally) second guessers.

We are a society that has to assign blame at every junction.

Not much Kudo's to "Celts executed what we gave them"! You don't know what is coming in a game. That was a hell of a play and a hell of a shot. The odds were in our favor put pierce pulled it off.

Maybe we thought Celts would come down and go for a quick two, then foul us, then see what happens. Not likely with no time outs. IM trying to look at the defense scheme were had and if were were willing to give them 2.

Im more upset about the way we folded in over time.

Whose fault is that? KNICKS! Coach and players!

He is not validating anti MDA, he is just the ultimate MDA defender and if he can call this out, then there must be validity there.

We are a society of fans and if we lose a game, there is nothing wrong with fans analyzing what was right and wrong in the game. That's what Forums are for - not just to wave pom poms regardless of outcomes.

I think MDA has been doing a better job of late with this team and hope to see continued improvement.

I think the MDA made a horrible decision that cost them a very important win.

Were there other issues in the game? Sure. Fields was awful, the switching defense without BIG recovery was vomit-able, the play call and execution for Melo with 4.9 was awful, Lin was in chaotic mode ... and we still played well enough and were coached well enough to win.

However, that one decision ruined that chance, and, that gives us a right as fans to question.

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:
Somebody should've tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court.

yeah that wouldve been smart so that that way they wouldve gotten 2 free throws and possession for a dead ball foul & potentially go up by 1 or 2 points....Brilliant coaching

So not fouling Rondo is a bad call? Fouling a 60% FT shooter is a bad call? Worst case Rondo hits both free throws, and we're still up 1 pt and just have to inbound the ball and hit our free throws...REMEMBER CELTS WERE OUT OF TIMEOUTS! Give me a break, MDA blew this game...

ChuckBuck wrote:

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:
Somebody should've tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court.

yeah that wouldve been smart so that that way they wouldve gotten 2 free throws and possession for a dead ball foul & potentially go up by 1 or 2 points....Brilliant coaching

So not fouling Rondo is a bad call? Fouling a 60% FT shooter is a bad call? Worst case Rondo hits both free throws, and we're still up 1 pt and just have to inbound the ball and hit our free throws...REMEMBER CELTS WERE OUT OF TIMEOUTS! Give me a break, MDA blew this game...

Of course he blew the game now that you know the outcome.

Foul rondo with how much time left?

Go to foul rondo you assume he does not pass the ball before you get him?

With the outcome known, Im sure you and mike would easily try something else.

I find it funny that fans look at "we lost the game" instead of "pierce wins the game".

Man, I watch a lot of basketball and I hate Pierce, but I that dagger left me in awe of his abilty not bitter about the way the knicks played it. Thats just me. IM not looking at assigning blame, or questioning. I thought he played it ok and sometimes the other team makes a great shot!

Lets agree to disagree. Nix is not the barameter of anything, I like the guy but I don't read his stuff.

I understand why fans are bitter, they love the team and want them to do well. There was no gross negligence. Up three is pretty good odds. We had 4.9 to get a good shot off. Melo was getting that ball and the whole place knew it.

And again, it was tied at that moment.

This has been fun.

Nalod wrote:
Oh, so NOW Nix validates any anti MDA?

Haters will look anywhere for support!

Im not defending MDA BTW, just calling out Monday morning (Literally) second guessers.

We are a society that has to assign blame at every junction.
Not much Kudo's to "Celts executed what we gave them"! You don't know what is coming in a game. That was a hell of a play and a hell of a shot. The odds were in our favor put pierce pulled it off.

Maybe we thought Celts would come down and go for a quick two, then foul us, then see what happens. Not likely with no time outs. IM trying to look at the defense scheme were had and if were were willing to give them 2.

Im more upset about the way we folded in over time.

Whose fault is that? KNICKS! Coach and players!

ChuckBuck wrote:

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:
Somebody should've tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court.

yeah that wouldve been smart so that that way they wouldve gotten 2 free throws and possession for a dead ball foul & potentially go up by 1 or 2 points....Brilliant coaching

So not fouling Rondo is a bad call? Fouling a 60% FT shooter is a bad call? Worst case Rondo hits both free throws, and we're still up 1 pt and just have to inbound the ball and hit our free throws...REMEMBER CELTS WERE OUT OF TIMEOUTS! Give me a break, MDA blew this game...

Clearly you don't understand that if they "tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court" that the ball is technically not in play (hence the clock not moving until the ball is touched...genius)& that by doing so this would be a dead ball foul, and as i stated in my original post would not only result in 2 free throws for Rondo but also give them possession of the ball.
So, since this fact is beyond your capacity, I will just move on & continue the discussion with people who actually understand basketball & all of its silly little rules.

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:
Somebody should've tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court.

yeah that wouldve been smart so that that way they wouldve gotten 2 free throws and possession for a dead ball foul & potentially go up by 1 or 2 points....Brilliant coaching

So not fouling Rondo is a bad call? Fouling a 60% FT shooter is a bad call? Worst case Rondo hits both free throws, and we're still up 1 pt and just have to inbound the ball and hit our free throws...REMEMBER CELTS WERE OUT OF TIMEOUTS! Give me a break, MDA blew this game...

Clearly you don't understand that if they "tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court" that the ball is technically not in play (hence the clock not moving until the ball is touched...genius)& that by doing so this would be a dead ball foul, and as i stated in my original post would not only result in 2 free throws for Rondo but also give them possession of the ball.
So, since this fact is beyond your capacity, I will just move on & continue the discussion with people who actually understand basketball & all of its silly little rules.

Is it a football field? Simple foul to a 60% FT shooter would do. Sorry if my figure of speech is beyond your Lintellect

ChuckBuck wrote:

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:
Somebody should've tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court.

yeah that wouldve been smart so that that way they wouldve gotten 2 free throws and possession for a dead ball foul & potentially go up by 1 or 2 points....Brilliant coaching

So not fouling Rondo is a bad call? Fouling a 60% FT shooter is a bad call? Worst case Rondo hits both free throws, and we're still up 1 pt and just have to inbound the ball and hit our free throws...REMEMBER CELTS WERE OUT OF TIMEOUTS! Give me a break, MDA blew this game...

Clearly you don't understand that if they "tackled Rondo while he was rolling that ball for 3/4ths of the court" that the ball is technically not in play (hence the clock not moving until the ball is touched...genius)& that by doing so this would be a dead ball foul, and as i stated in my original post would not only result in 2 free throws for Rondo but also give them possession of the ball.
So, since this fact is beyond your capacity, I will just move on & continue the discussion with people who actually understand basketball & all of its silly little rules.

Is it a football field? Simple foul to a 60% FT shooter would do. Sorry if my figure of speech is beyond your Lintellect

WOW...you still dont get it, do you??? Regardless of how you foul him (tackling, punch to the chest or a D. Wade style nose breaking) & regardless of his FT percentage, if you foul someone while the ball is not in playthis is a dead ball foul & results in free throws & possession for the other team. I think we all can agree that, that would've been an unwise move at that point in the game.

If you're still unclear about this, maybe one of the other members who are early education or special ed teachers can step in & use smaller words to explain it.

ActionJackson wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Action look at the video again:

[/YouTube]

Look at clock while your watching. Rondo has the ball for 5 seconds, and KG has the ball for another 3 or 4 seconds, before he even hands the ball to Paul Pierce, who even manages to dribble once and throw a pump fake for good measure.

You're telling me Novak can't wrap up Rondo?
You're telling me Shumpert couldn't wrap up KG before the hand off?
You're telling me JR couldn't tug on Pierce's jersey before the switch?

(Channeling Cris Carter) COME ON MAN!!!

Those are interesting scenarios that you suggest but not what you originally posted. What you originally said was to "tackle him as the ball was rolling up court" which as i have have pointed out numerous times would've been a dead ball foul & been a bad thing for NYK.

Sorry, I didn't mean literal "tackling" in the original post. That would suggest stirring up a bench clearing brawl.