Adam Silver talking about allowing HS graduates enter NBA draft...

[FirstDownB]

I do not watch the NBA. I avoid it because I do not agree with the refs decision not to call fouls on stars and to give them wider latitude offensively and defensively relative to other players. In college, they foul out All-Americans if warranted. remember the NBA ref who scouted out mistresses for MJ? Far too much bend-over-backwards treatment.

Not an NBA fan, but I'd rather an established, star player receive some latitude from the officials than some 18 year old kid who happens to be wearing the "right" uniform. NBA officiating from what I've seen is at least mostly consistent - the best players get the benefit of the doubt from all refs, home or away, regardless of who they play for. NCAA officiating is wildly inconsistent from home to away, from ref to ref, and from marquee school/coach to no-name school/coach.

 

[TC4THREE]

the best players get the benefit of the doubt from all refs, home or away, regardless of who they play for

Which kind of makes being one of "the best players" a self-fulfilling prophecy doesn't it?

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Maybe Lebron will opt out and go play with the Warriors next year so you can marvel at them again!

I didn't like Durant's decision to go to the most talented team in the league, but those kinds of decisions are made all the time on the college level, where UK and Duke stockpile the five star talent.

What I like about Golden State is that they share the ball. They actually play as a team. Cleveland is a great team and right now they don't even look like they belong on the court with Golden State. It will be interesting to see how the Cavs do at home.

 

[BoilerStation]

I do not watch the NBA. I avoid it because I do not agree with the refs decision not to call fouls on stars and to give them wider latitude offensively and defensively relative to other players. In college, they foul out All-Americans if warranted. remember the NBA ref who scouted out mistresses for MJ? Far too much bend-over-backwards treatment.

College basketball also suffers from star treatment and its not like you don't see stars in foul trouble either during NBA games.

 

[StickPurdue]

College basketball also suffers from star treatment and its not like you don't see stars in foul trouble either during NBA games.

Would the NBA foul out two stars on a double foul like in the Purdue vs IU game? Because that was fun.

 

[ahhculdee]

Golden State plays beautiful basketball. Curry is a once in a lifetime talent.

 

[vantalge]

Don't think it changes the college game at all. It is completely idiotic for the NBA but if morons are watching it right now, they will still watch it afterwards.

So people who watch the NBA are morons? Ratings and world-wide popularity of the league are better than ever, so there must be a lot of morons out there. Unless you happen to be the moron, of course.

 

[TC4THREE]

So people who watch the NBA are morons?

Yes the vast majority.

there must be a lot of morons out there.

Look at the world today. Is there any question? The NBA is just one indicator but there are many others.

 

[HUNTER46120]

Tim Donaghy. Enough said.

Also they should make the players dribble the basketball every now and again.

Have they changed the rules to protect players that can't hit free throws yet? The fact that they were even discussing this says a ton.

I have always felt (much moreso in the last 5-10 years) that the NBA "rigs" their games. It resembles the WWF in the fact when I used to watch I didn't think it was real, staged if you will, not everything in the game but the outcome for sure.
The WWF and NBA have many fans just not me. I can't watch a sporting event if i think the outcome is pre-arranged. Basketball is one of the easiest sports to do this. It can be done in others but more obvious and difficult. I did watch alot of NBA in the 80s-90s. I have either grown out of it or the game has changed.

 

[BoilerStation]

Would the NBA foul out two stars on a double foul like in the Purdue vs IU game? Because that was fun.

The wrong call was made. If anything this shows the NBA is more likely to get that call correct instead of wrong like the college refs did. I'm not saying the NBA doesn't give special treatment to the stars but let's not pretend like it doesn't happen in college basketball for star players as well as coaches. How many times have we ever seen that happen in a college game anyways where 2 players foul out on a single play? Happening a single time doesn't prove anything.

 

[BoilerStation]

Yes the vast majority.



Look at the world today. Is there any question? The NBA is just one indicator but there are many others.

We get it. You hate the NBA and think those who like it are idiots. So why don't you just GTFO of these threads talking about the NBA and ignore them if you hate it so much.

 

[TC4THREE]

We get it. You hate the NBA and think those who like it are idiots. So why don't you just GTFO of these threads talking about the NBA and ignore them if you hate it so much.

Why can't I express my opinion on the NBA also?

 

[Dryfly88]

Why can't I express my opinion on the NBA also?

I don't think anyone has a problem with you not liking the NBA. The problem is your over the top criticism and name calling of the people that do like it.

I don't like the NBA, but I wouldn't call those that do morons.

 

[vantalge]

I have always felt (much moreso in the last 5-10 years) that the NBA "rigs" their games. It resembles the WWF in the fact when I used to watch I didn't think it was real, staged if you will, not everything in the game but the outcome for sure.
The WWF and NBA have many fans just not me. I can't watch a sporting event if i think the outcome is pre-arranged. Basketball is one of the easiest sports to do this. It can be done in others but more obvious and difficult. I did watch alot of NBA in the 80s-90s. I have either grown out of it or the game has changed.

You've grown out of it. Older fans rarely seem to like the NBA, for a variety of reasons. To think the outcome is rigged is a ridiculous statement. Home court advantage comes into play, but that's always been the case. People have been bitching about refs since Day One.
If the games were rigged, wouldn't the NBA have "arranged" for the earlier playoff rounds to last longer to increase revenue? No matter what happens in the NBA games or draft, someone always thinks there's a conspiracy. Very weird.

 

[TC4THREE]

You've grown out of it. Older fans rarely seem to like the NBA, for a variety of reasons. To think the outcome is rigged is a ridiculous statement. Home court advantage comes into play, but that's always been the case. People have been bitching about refs since Day One.
If the games were rigged, wouldn't the NBA have "arranged" for the earlier playoff rounds to last longer to increase revenue? No matter what happens in the NBA games or draft, someone always thinks there's a conspiracy. Very weird.

That could be because it's the only league I'm aware of where an official not only admitted to fixing results but also told tales of other refs making calls to dictate the outcome of games. I'm guessing you would've thought the accusations of games being rigged were ridiculous before Donaghy as well.

I haven't watched the NBA for a long time but I distinctly remember watching players routinely get called for fouls guarding Jordan when they literally didn't even make contact with him.

 

[TC4THREE]

I don't think anyone has a problem with you not liking the NBA. The problem is your over the top criticism and name calling of the people that do like it.

I don't like the NBA, but I wouldn't call those that do morons.

I'm sorry I didn't mean to imply every single fan. Just seems like most of them that I've ever known, met, or observed.

 

[vantalge]

That could be because it's the only league I'm aware of where an official not only admitted to fixing results but also told tales of other refs making calls to dictate the outcome of games. I'm guessing you would've thought the accusations of games being rigged were ridiculous before Donaghy as well.

I haven't watched the NBA for a long time but I distinctly remember watching players routinely get called for fouls guarding Jordan when they literally didn't even make contact with him.

The Donaghy episode was ugly, and tarnished the NBA. But he's not credible enough to take his word for anything, and the fact he accused other refs of fixing games doesn't mean it happened. (Doesn't mean it didn't, either.) But to assume the entire league is rigged because of one rogue ref makes no sense.

 

[djy2j]

I'm sorry I didn't mean to imply every single fan. Just seems like most of them that I've ever known, met, or observed.

Yes you did. You said it multiple times.

 

[TC4THREE]

Yes you did. You said it multiple times.

After going back and reading what I've posted in this thread, I don't feel I implied that every single fan was a moron. I certainly implied that I think that in general. Obviously there are bound to be a few exceptions.

 

[TC4THREE]

The Donaghy episode was ugly, and tarnished the NBA. But he's not credible enough to take his word for anything, and the fact he accused other refs of fixing games doesn't mean it happened. (Doesn't mean it didn't, either.) But to assume the entire league is rigged because of one rogue ref makes no sense.

Well when they officiate the league as they do (to promote individuals over teams) and then have an incident like that, it's not hard for me to imagine. I tend to believe most of the accusations he made regarding other officials and the league.

 

[Statey]

Well when they officiate the league as they do (to promote individuals over teams) and then have an incident like that, it's not hard for me to imagine. I tend to believe most of the accusations he made regarding other officials and the league.

What's your take on MLB? Pete Rose bet on baseball when he was a manager. That's really not all that much different from a ref doing it. Does that incident make it "not hard for you to imagine" that it's pervasive throughout that sport as well?

 

[TC4THREE]

What's your take on MLB? Pete Rose bet on baseball when he was a manager. That's really not all that much different from a ref doing it. Does that incident make it "not hard for you to imagine" that it's pervasive throughout that sport as well?

That is a very different situation in my opinion.

First, I don't recall him implicating others. Donaghy actually implicated the NBA front office of using officials to alter playoff series and frankly I 100% believe that.

Second he was a manager which is a bit different than an official. So long as a manager isn't betting for/against his own team, I don't think he is changing the outcome of the games. Doesn't make it right, but it is very different than having officials bet on games they are involved in.

From my recollection, he always denied betting on Reds games but given how his story changed over time I'm not sure if that was the latest story on that situation or not.

I'm not so naive to think there haven't been other incidents. I'm sure it's happened in college many times. But to my knowledge nothing that has come out has come close to be as damning as what Donaghy described in the NBA.

Finally, I don't need the Donaghy story to dislike the NBA. I can 100% dislike it on its own merit. I just think the people who defend it and say it can't possibly be rigged are being naive when we know that story.

 

[Statey]

That is a very different situation in my opinion.

First, I don't recall him implicating others. Donaghy actually implicated the NBA front office of using officials to alter playoff series and frankly I 100% believe that.

Second he was a manager which is a bit different than an official. So long as a manager isn't betting for/against his own team, I don't think he is changing the outcome of the games. Doesn't make it right, but it is very different than having officials bet on games they are involved in.

From my recollection, he always denied betting on Reds games but given how his story changed over time I'm not sure if that was the latest story on that situation or not.

I'm not so naive to think there haven't been other incidents. I'm sure it's happened in college many times. But to my knowledge nothing that has come out has come close to be as damning as what Donaghy described in the NBA.

Finally, I don't need the Donaghy story to dislike the NBA. I can 100% dislike it on its own merit. I just think the people who defend it and say it can't possibly be rigged are being naive when we know that story.

That's fair, but I'll counter with this: First, just because Rose didn't implicate others doesn't mean others weren't doing it. Donaghy rolling over on others could just be a difference in cultures over the time period in question. Maybe Rose just took the high road and didn't throw others under the bus in attempt to save himself like some a-holes would (i.e. Donaghy).

Second, I'd argue that the difference between a manager doing it vs a ref isn't all that much. In both instances, a guy is getting paid to make the best decision and judgment possible to honor his job description, whatever that job is. And in both cases, that judgment and decision making is now potentially impacted through the possibility of winning and losing with the bookie. Yes, it's different because Donaghy is supposed to be impartial to all teams, and Rose was supposed to be loyal to just one, but if - IF - he ever bet on the Reds to lose, then that difference is thrown out the window completely.

And even if he only bet on the Reds to win, he could still have been betting on run spreads and/or other things where he'd have a financial interest that deviated from that of the best interest of the team where his judgment could have been comprised.

 

[arcb102000]

There is a report by a writer for the Fresno Bee that the Cleveland locker-room smelled strongly of marajuana after the most recent playoff game. It is hard to take seriously the NBA if this is true. Also, haven't they done anti-drug PSAs in the not too long ago past?

 

[Indy_Rider]

What's your take on MLB? Pete Rose bet on baseball when he was a manager. That's really not all that much different from a ref doing it. Does that incident make it "not hard for you to imagine" that it's pervasive throughout that sport as well?

I think it's hugely different because Rose was to much of a competitor and always bet on his team to win. So there wasn't anyway he was actually effecting the out come of the game by doing so.

 

[Indy_Rider]

That is a very different situation in my opinion.

First, I don't recall him implicating others. Donaghy actually implicated the NBA front office of using officials to alter playoff series and frankly I 100% believe that.

Second he was a manager which is a bit different than an official. So long as a manager isn't betting for/against his own team, I don't think he is changing the outcome of the games. Doesn't make it right, but it is very different than having officials bet on games they are involved in.

From my recollection, he always denied betting on Reds games but given how his story changed over time I'm not sure if that was the latest story on that situation or not.

I'm not so naive to think there haven't been other incidents. I'm sure it's happened in college many times. But to my knowledge nothing that has come out has come close to be as damning as what Donaghy described in the NBA.

Finally, I don't need the Donaghy story to dislike the NBA. I can 100% dislike it on its own merit. I just think the people who defend it and say it can't possibly be rigged are being naive when we know that story.

I could've swore I remember hearing Rose admitted to betting on the Reds, but never against them.

 

[TC4THREE]

I could've swore I remember hearing Rose admitted to betting on the Reds, but never against them.

Could be. Like I said, that story changed several times as it evolved from his initial claim never to have bet on baseball at all. Overall, it seems far less clear what he did than what Donaghy admitted he did/saw. The Rose situation could be far worse than we know or it could be nothing.

FWIW, my stance on Rose is quite different if he bet on games he was managing as opposed to a random Yankees/Tigers game he had nothing to do with. I still think he deserved to be banned but perhaps not permanently. It's been 28 years I think since they enacted that. If he never bet on/against his own team, I'd support allowing him back in a limited capacity. Certainly not back in any sort of functioning capacity but I'd allow him to be in the Hall of Fame and to take part in various events and celebrations he's eligible to take part in.

On the other hand, if he bet on the Reds then I don't think you allow him back. Given that they've held on this long and that he's 74 years old, I think there's likely no intention of MLB to bring him back in the fold or allow him to be in the Hall of Fame but to their credit I think it was good to allow him to take part in a few celebrations in the past.

 

[Statey]

I think it's hugely different because Rose was to much of a competitor and always bet on his team to win. So there wasn't anyway he was actually effecting the out come of the game by doing so.

You may be right, but if your source for this is Rose himself, I'd caution just blindly accepting it and basing your entire position on that being a fact.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

I think it's hugely different because Rose was to much of a competitor and always bet on his team to win. So there wasn't anyway he was actually effecting the out come of the game by doing so.

Perhaps.....but as Devil's Advocate.....say Rose has a few grand on the Reds to win. It's 7-6 Cincinnati in the 6th in the second game of a long road trip. Does Rose use up his bullpen at all costs to win the game, like a finale of a playoff series? What if it's in extra innings? It's a 162-game season. Not saying Pete Rose ever did this, but the potential risk is there. JMO.

This coming from a huge Pete Rose fan who followed every one of his games during the 44-game hit streak. Damn those Braves and Gene Garber.

 

[HUNTER46120]

You've grown out of it. Older fans rarely seem to like the NBA, for a variety of reasons. To think the outcome is rigged is a ridiculous statement. Home court advantage comes into play, but that's always been the case. People have been bitching about refs since Day One.
If the games were rigged, wouldn't the NBA have "arranged" for the earlier playoff rounds to last longer to increase revenue? No matter what happens in the NBA games or draft, someone always thinks there's a conspiracy. Very weird.

I don't think every NBA game is rigged. This by no means proves my point but the reason I didn't watch the pacers (I still root for them) is in my mind their was no way the NBA was going to let the pacers beat the cavs so why watch. I didn't watch the playoffs because i thought it was pre-arranged for the cavs and golden st to be in the finals. Does the NBA care who wins the finals? probably not, but they sure cared who was in them.
oh, are you calling me old? tic.

 

[Indy_Rider]

That's fair, but I'll counter with this: First, just because Rose didn't implicate others doesn't mean others weren't doing it. Donaghy rolling over on others could just be a difference in cultures over the time period in question. Maybe Rose just took the high road and didn't throw others under the bus in attempt to save himself like some a-holes would (i.e. Donaghy).

Second, I'd argue that the difference between a manager doing it vs a ref isn't all that much. In both instances, a guy is getting paid to make the best decision and judgment possible to honor his job description, whatever that job is. And in both cases, that judgment and decision making is now potentially impacted through the possibility of winning and losing with the bookie. Yes, it's different because Donaghy is supposed to be impartial to all teams, and Rose was supposed to be loyal to just one, but if - IF - he ever bet on the Reds to lose, then that difference is thrown out the window completely.

And even if he only bet on the Reds to win, he could still have been betting on run spreads and/or other things where he'd have a financial interest that deviated from that of the best interest of the team where his judgment could have been comprised.

The way Rose is wired and as compe

Could be. Like I said, that story changed several times as it evolved from his initial claim never to have bet on baseball at all. Overall, it seems far less clear what he did than what Donaghy admitted he did/saw. The Rose situation could be far worse than we know or it could be nothing.

FWIW, my stance on Rose is quite different if he bet on games he was managing as opposed to a random Yankees/Tigers game he had nothing to do with. I still think he deserved to be banned but perhaps not permanently. It's been 28 years I think since they enacted that. If he never bet on/against his own team, I'd support allowing him back in a limited capacity. Certainly not back in any sort of functioning capacity but I'd allow him to be in the Hall of Fame and to take part in various events and celebrations he's eligible to take part in.

On the other hand, if he bet on the Reds then I don't think you allow him back. Given that they've held on this long and that he's 74 years old, I think there's likely no intention of MLB to bring him back in the fold or allow him to be in the Hall of Fame but to their credit I think it was good to allow him to take part in a few celebrations in the past.

Oh, I agree he deserved to be banned from managing, still think he should be in the Hall as a player though, nothing he has done effected what he did on the field and that is what the Hall should be.

 

[Statey]

The way Rose is wired and as compe

Did you mean to say "The way Rose is wired covfefe" ?