StarksEwing1 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I really believe that everyone is in on it. Coaches players refs and owners. After all NBA is a business Maximizing revenue is the main goal. Still trying to figure out Vogel pulling Hibbert and Pop pulling Duncan. Left me scratching my head.

To be fair if they really wanted to make money and rig a game they would have let the knicks win. Miami vs New York and lebron vs melo is much more marketable than Miami Vs Pacers. So for the last time as much as i despise The pacers they played a lot better than we did

Knicks made their money. Pacers a small market team needs all the revenue possible. You have to remember if a team goes defunct nobody wins as teams are needed to play the game. This is also a revenue sharing league when your sharing it really doesn't matter who wins as long as revenues can be maximized. Besides the Knicks winning does nothing for ratings as the Knicks when they went to the finals were one of the worst rated games. Believe it or not the Knicks are only a big deal in this area. They don't have a following like the Lakers and Celtics. Knicks are always lacking the superstar to promote Melo is the modern day Ewing, Barkley, Malone. LeBron is the Jordan of this era.

Silverfuel wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

skeng wrote:we were pretty close to getting that game 7 in MSG.. :(

True, but if you read any of the offseason coverage and predictions stuff, you'd of thought we got swept by them. A lot of posters on these boards act like that too.

You are making some really good points smackeddog.

It is only a few posters that act like we got swept. They didn't like the team from the very beginning and almost wanted it to fail so that they could complain and claim to have been right all along. Most of the fans are smart enough to know how devastated our front line was by injuries and we still almost forced a game 7. If we had gotten the right calls and if JR could hit some shots we could have won that series with a broken down team. I think we are better team this year.

"A few posters"? Why not just give names? We all know you're talking about JRod and Holfresh anyway!

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:the martin foul: smith and then melo could not stop penetration. both lunged with their arms instead of moving their feet. with perimeter defense like that something bad is bound to happen. i guess martin checked him with the body. refs punish porous perimeter defense i guess.

If you give the refs the benefit of the doubt you say 'I guess he checked him with his body'. The problem is the game was very physical and if that happened it appeared it should be a no call in regards to how the game was officiated. It was an elimination game and the team on the verge of being eliminated was up before that stretch of calls in the fourth. The Knicks as a group last year did not handle calls against them well especially if they were close calls or missed calls. It seemed to effect their play and a ten minute run of calls like that in a series deciding game doomed them.
My guess, if it goes to seven the Pacers still probably take it but the officials impacted game 6 in the fourth quarter like the first game of the playoffs against Miami the previous year. It is very hard for a team to play at the same or higher level then their opponent if they also think they are being sabotaged by the officials. The calls definitely favored the Pacers and their style of play and seemed to be Pacer friendly minimally in that game.

i never liked the amount of whining the knicks do collectively. you get the feeling that crawford and javee and most refs in general will have it in for you if they see too much whining in the playoffs. it is a given that playoff games are going to be rougher no question. and passions are high, too. maybe if the knicks had a reputation for beng a playoff-tough type team and not a three-point shooting regular-season team they would have gotten better calls. still, the team as a whole lacks poise.

playa2 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I really believe that everyone is in on it. Coaches players refs and owners. After all NBA is a business Maximizing revenue is the main goal. Still trying to figure out Vogel pulling Hibbert and Pop pulling Duncan. Left me scratching my head.

To be fair if they really wanted to make money and rig a game they would have let the knicks win. Miami vs New York and lebron vs melo is much more marketable than Miami Vs Pacers. So for the last time as much as i despise The pacers they played a lot better than we did

That is not true , it's not about marketable, SanAntonio would have never won.

Everybody has to be in on it or they wouldn't have a job. coaches some players and owners.

NFL is the same way off coordinators calling wrong plays against certain defense.

And the def coordinators calling prevent defense being when the defense has been stopping them the whole game.

Hey playa you are giving NBA and the world in general too much credit for being smart.
The world and NBA are full of idiots and most of thing that happening are a random sequence of mistakes.
Eventually it converges for everybody to get what they deserve. But this can take more than a lifetime, so who cares.

playa2 wrote:Many of these calls changed or killed momentum for the knicks during a hotly contested game where the knicks had come back and put fear in the pacers in the 4th qtr. Remember this is PLAYOFF BASKETBALLTicky tack fouls aren't called.

Rigged for what? So the team that plays in the biggest media market in the world, with the most population (thus, the most television sets..hint hint), that plays at one of the most famous arenas, that has the NBA's leading scorer and most likeable style of play for casual basketball fans (iffy defense, 3 point barrages, alley oop dunks), that leads the league in merchandise sales, country wide popularity can get knocked out so.....INDIANA can advance to play the LEBRON JAMES AND THE HEAT?

Ohhhh lord have mercy.

Here is what's wrong with your conspiracy theory, my child. IF...IFFFFF....there was rigging in the NBA, the KNICKS, not THE PACERS, THE NEW YORK KNICKS...would be the ones who would advance. Use some common sense.

There are bad calls, no doubt. Heck, maybe a couple of the refs even hate NYC and gave them a few dirty calls. But, what you're saying is that the league set it up...RIGGED...for NY to lose. That means they intentionally wanted to oust New York out of the playoffs.

Now riddle me this, Batman....WHY THE FUCK would they not want the NEW YORK KNICKS to play THE WORLD CHAMPION MIAMI HEAT in the SIXTH BOROUGH of NY (Miami, for the slow folks) in the EASTERN CONFERENCE FINALS over ****ty ass Indiana?

Gsus wrote:

Vmart wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I really believe that everyone is in on it. Coaches players refs and owners. After all NBA is a business Maximizing revenue is the main goal. Still trying to figure out Vogel pulling Hibbert and Pop pulling Duncan. Left me scratching my head.

To be fair if they really wanted to make money and rig a game they would have let the knicks win. Miami vs New York and lebron vs melo is much more marketable than Miami Vs Pacers. So for the last time as much as i despise The pacers they played a lot better than we did

Knicks made their money. Pacers a small market team needs all the revenue possible. You have to remember if a team goes defunct nobody wins as teams are needed to play the game. This is also a revenue sharing league when your sharing it really doesn't matter who wins as long as revenues can be maximized. Besides the Knicks winning does nothing for ratings as the Knicks when they went to the finals were one of the worst rated games. Believe it or not the Knicks are only a big deal in this area. They don't have a following like the Lakers and Celtics. Knicks are always lacking the superstar to promote Melo is the modern day Ewing, Barkley, Malone. LeBron is the Jordan of this era.

Oh, look-a-here..I got my answer...and I spat my coffee.

Seriously? C'mon, man. So let me picture this. David Stern holds a meeting, and says "listen guys, Knicks made their money, it's time for Indiana to make some, so let's risk all our credibility to rig the games so they can advance, so a team that plays in the middle of corn fields which couldn't even sell out regular season games advances, while 8 million New Yorkers tune out for the ECF, because you know, we don't really give a **** about ratings, because all ratings does is, you know, PUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ADVERTISING REVENUE AND TV CONTRACTS IN OUR POCKETS."

Ummm..no, didn't go down. Trust me.

And the reason why the 99 ratings were so low? You had a pre-dynasty Spurs team playing in it, against an 8th seeded team that had no business being on the floor with them, in a LOCKOUT SHORTENED SEASON, where fans were pissed off at the league. Unlike the last lockout, where fans were feigning for basketball, in 1999, there was anger and rage, and many fans declared they wouldn't go back because unlike the last one, where owners were lambasted for locking the players out because of greed, etc, the players were blamed for the '99 one, thus the outrage..over "millionaire basketball players acting like babies". It reflected in the ratings throughout the year, not just the Finals. As a matter of fact, the team you say that people really care about, the Lakers, had ****ty ratings during their DYNASTY, for the same reason...dominating a bull**** team during a time when people didn't give a ****.

Let's present some facts here once in a while.

I think the ratings went down because of MJ retiring more then anything..

Gsus wrote:

Vmart wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I really believe that everyone is in on it. Coaches players refs and owners. After all NBA is a business Maximizing revenue is the main goal. Still trying to figure out Vogel pulling Hibbert and Pop pulling Duncan. Left me scratching my head.

To be fair if they really wanted to make money and rig a game they would have let the knicks win. Miami vs New York and lebron vs melo is much more marketable than Miami Vs Pacers. So for the last time as much as i despise The pacers they played a lot better than we did

Knicks made their money. Pacers a small market team needs all the revenue possible. You have to remember if a team goes defunct nobody wins as teams are needed to play the game. This is also a revenue sharing league when your sharing it really doesn't matter who wins as long as revenues can be maximized. Besides the Knicks winning does nothing for ratings as the Knicks when they went to the finals were one of the worst rated games. Believe it or not the Knicks are only a big deal in this area. They don't have a following like the Lakers and Celtics. Knicks are always lacking the superstar to promote Melo is the modern day Ewing, Barkley, Malone. LeBron is the Jordan of this era.

Oh, look-a-here..I got my answer...and I spat my coffee.

Seriously? C'mon, man. So let me picture this. David Stern holds a meeting, and says "listen guys, Knicks made their money, it's time for Indiana to make some, so let's risk all our credibility to rig the games so they can advance, so a team that plays in the middle of corn fields which couldn't even sell out regular season games advances, while 8 million New Yorkers tune out for the ECF, because you know, we don't really give a **** about ratings, because all ratings does is, you know, PUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ADVERTISING REVENUE AND TV CONTRACTS IN OUR POCKETS."

Ummm..no, didn't go down. Trust me.

And the reason why the 99 ratings were so low? You had a pre-dynasty Spurs team playing in it, against an 8th seeded team that had no business being on the floor with them, in a LOCKOUT SHORTENED SEASON, where fans were pissed off at the league. Unlike the last lockout, where fans were feigning for basketball, in 1999, there was anger and rage, and many fans declared they wouldn't go back because unlike the last one, where owners were lambasted for locking the players out because of greed, etc, the players were blamed for the '99 one, thus the outrage..over "millionaire basketball players acting like babies". It reflected in the ratings throughout the year, not just the Finals. As a matter of fact, the team you say that people really care about, the Lakers, had ****ty ratings during their DYNASTY, for the same reason...dominating a bull**** team during a time when people didn't give a ****.

Let's present some facts here once in a while.

A lot of stuff can't be proved and there is a veil of secrecy that the NBA works under that we will never know if it is true. There is a lot of stuff that is shady at best. When news breaks that the 80's knicks were involved with point shaving if the players are doing this. You don't think the NBA has a system to make sure revenue is maximized. Shady deals, Lakers and Celtics, friends getting together.

After Jordan left every time they got the Knicks into the finals and guess what the Knicks were a ratings disaster so much for your large market theory. The Finals are about entire nation not just NY area like I said Knicks don't have the following of the Lakers or Celtics do, and they never had the superstar that had the charisma and talent level of a Bird, Magic, Jordan and now LeBron. A player has more fans than a team, follow that theory. The draw of the NBA is the players. Jersey sales sneaker sales whatever sales. Once a star player is established protect that player with calls so to make him seem bigger than life.

IronWillGiroud wrote:i think the fact that we generally suck is proof that there is no conspiracy in the works,

also i do think there are indirect ways of influencing outcomes, but no one can ever really come out and say "call this guy tough" or "call that guy this way";

because it's just too wild to control,

one person can conspire and keep it tight, but as soon as you add a second, a third? forget it, i'm sure this all some fancy cosmos/unicorn/game theory type stuff because it just becomes too complex (like aliens and ****). the complexity balloons, which is why conspiracies don't exist in the way you and me commonly imagine them.

I think it's far easier for David stern to control the refs than the choas you imagine. Bottom line is The refs have no one to answer to other than the league office. We fans can sit here and complain and make all the conspiracy YouTube videos we like and whether we are correct in our observations or not it will have no impact on the referees whatsoever. Refs can call a game however they like and there's really very little we can do as outsiders to isolate and punish corruption. Even justified complaints are easily dismissible as homerism, you even have smug cynics defending the nonsense calls in order to prove to the world that they are too intelligent to be blinded by team loyalty. As a result of these factors, the refs have autonomy to fix the game however the league office commands them. Whether you believe the Knicks pacer series was fixed or not, a ft disparity of 44 to 18 will always raise eyebrows.

knickscity wrote:A jump shooting iso team not getting free throws will not raise eyebrows if the games were watched.

I distinctly remember Melo taking to the rim strong many times and Hibbert absolutely clobbering him without a peep from officials.

knickscity wrote:

Dagger wrote:

knickscity wrote:A jump shooting iso team not getting free throws will not raise eyebrows if the games were watched.

I distinctly remember Melo taking to the rim strong many times and Hibbert absolutely clobbering him without a peep from officials.

many times? I think not, can you provide data to support that.

Not sure why melo is being single out when I stated a jump shooting "team" though.

Do I have data to show how many times he drove to the basket? Really dude? Really? *Facepalm*