If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBA)   How can this year's Celtics even think about beating Miami? Simple: just hit a game-winning, three-point shot--with only :00.6 remaining   (nba.com) divider line 20
    More: Unlikely, Celtics, Miami, AmericanAirlines Arena  
•       •       •

590 clicks; posted to Sports » on 11 Nov 2013 at 9:15 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



20 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-11 07:49:55 AM  
How can this year's Celtics even think about beating Miami? Simple: just hit a game-winning, three-point shot--with only :00.6 remaining

/FTFY
 
2013-11-11 09:35:55 AM  
FARK: Two days ago.
 
2013-11-11 09:46:11 AM  
meh, it is early season.  wait for teams to find their rhythm and the injuries to start showing up.  If the Celtics can do this again in the 2nd half of the season, then it is somewhat of a big deal.
 
2013-11-11 09:55:09 AM  
My favorite Tommy line of the season so far is, "Kris Humphries is too good to play" responding to the question "Why is Hump playing?"
 
2013-11-11 10:09:04 AM  
Hoo. The highlights have Lebron James defending both the buzzer-beater at the half by Crawford, and the buzzer-beater at the end of the game by Green.

Doesn't really mean much, but hoo.
 
2013-11-11 10:09:31 AM  
I'm a Celtics fan, trust me, we're not making the playoffs this year. Beating Miami once in the regular season means nothing. We're just going to build up our rookies and wait out the Humphries and Wallace contracts.
 
2013-11-11 10:09:45 AM  
Defending unsuccessfully, I should say.

/ Preview is for suckers
 
2013-11-11 10:29:01 AM  

soopey: FARK: Two days ago.


And still zero farks given.
 
2013-11-11 10:54:53 AM  
The feeling I get with the NBA is that the ref's probably DO try to "control" games more than they should, but, not from a "trying to get a certain team a win" standpoint like most people tend to think, but, more of a "when possible, try to get a game to be 'interesting' in the final 6 minutes" sort of action, almost like the ref's are the "NBA Jam Auto-compensate" for the league's interests.   I mean, if an NBA team could have just about every game comfortable and be winning by at least 6-8 points in the final 3 minutes and basically have the game under "control"... that makes for very "dull" games overall, over the course of the season... it is exciting for the team's fans, but, ultimately doesn't provide any game drama, which is what the LEAGUE needs... the team, if they are winning comfortably 90% of games, their fans are happy, that's all they care about.

And, I guess that fact is possible in a lot of sports, but, I think it gets magnified in basketball vs. baseball, hockey, football, soccer (which all for various reasons, the games are just naturally "closer" during most of the game more of the time anyway... and their ref's have much less ability to "control" the flow of a game than basketball).

IMO, the NBA might be better off going to a more "electronic" ref'ing system...... have the ref's on the court, and they get a "button" they press when they believe a foul was committed.   Each ref also has a fish eye camera they wear, that a booth operator is watching, and someone in the booth is also watching a "close up" TV style camera, and they are have "foul" buttons as well.   A foul is only called if TWO of any of those people (between the court ref's and the video ref's) hit the foul button in a certain time frame (within 1-1.5 seconds lets say)... that maybe makes something the ref's wear "buzz", and they know to blow the whistle then.   Granted... if there is a concerted effort to "manage" games by ref's, it could still be done with more ref's doing it that way, but, if we think it is just too much control by single ref's, an "instant committee" solution might be better.
 
2013-11-11 11:04:38 AM  

Palmer Eldritch: I'm a Celtics fan, trust me, we're not making the playoffs this year. Beating Miami once in the regular season means nothing. We're just going to build up our rookies and wait out the Humphries and Wallace contracts.



I agree with everything you say except the bold part, I wouldn't be shocked to see them land a 7 or 8 seed despite their mediocrity.
 
2013-11-11 11:20:04 AM  
What gives? I thought they were tanking this season?
 
2013-11-11 11:20:59 AM  

Dr_luckyz: Palmer Eldritch: I'm a Celtics fan, trust me, we're not making the playoffs this year. Beating Miami once in the regular season means nothing. We're just going to build up our rookies and wait out the Humphries and Wallace contracts.


I agree with everything you say except the bold part, I wouldn't be shocked to see them land a 7 or 8 seed despite their mediocrity.


Yeah, the east always seems to be very mediocre around 6-10th place... anyone who is around that level can get one of those last 2-3 spots, and it is just kind of a crapshoot.  (which those teams right now lately have been Atlanta, Boston, Milwaukee, Philly, Toronto, Detroit).
 
2013-11-11 11:34:52 AM  

dletter: Yeah, the east always seems to be very mediocre around 6-10th place... anyone who is around that level can get one of those last 2-3 spots, and it is just kind of a crapshoot. (which those teams right now lately have been Atlanta, Boston, Milwaukee, Philly, Toronto, Detroit).


I think this year the East playoffs is:

TOO GOOD TO MISS IT:
Brooklyn
Indiana
Chicago
Miami

COMPETING FOR A SPOT:
New York
Cleveland
Milwaukee
Detroit
Atlanta
Washington

NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT:
Philadelphia
Toronto
Boston
Charlotte
Orlando

Of the teams competing for a spot, I think New York is going to miss out, but the competition for the last spot will be fierce. There are too many teams right now that said "playoffs or bust" (Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Washington in particular) for a team like Boston to sneak in. Only Atlanta has the talent to get a playoff spot without really trying. The five teams I listed at the bottom will be happy to give their rookies burn and look to the draft.
 
2013-11-11 11:42:22 AM  
I don't think Miami needs a one seed. I do think they need to win their division.  The will probably get the 2 seed on cruise control. The Celtics were on cruise control during the regular seaon and made it to the finals. Indiana is going to give it their all this regular season and post season.  They need the one seed more than Miami does. Chicago will likely gel deeper into the regular season. I don't believe in NY or Brooklyn. I wonder if a team like Orlando can surprise everyone and grab a playoff seed. 6-8 can be had with a 500 record.


Their division includes
Orlando
Carolina
Atlanta
Washington
 
2013-11-11 12:33:33 PM  

dletter: The feeling I get with the NBA is that the ref's probably DO try to "control" games more than they should, but, not from a "trying to get a certain team a win" standpoint like most people tend to think, but, more of a "when possible, try to get a game to be 'interesting' in the final 6 minutes" sort of action, almost like the ref's are the "NBA Jam Auto-compensate" for the league's interests.   I mean, if an NBA team could have just about every game comfortable and be winning by at least 6-8 points in the final 3 minutes and basically have the game under "control"... that makes for very "dull" games overall, over the course of the season... it is exciting for the team's fans, but, ultimately doesn't provide any game drama, which is what the LEAGUE needs... the team, if they are winning comfortably 90% of games, their fans are happy, that's all they care about.

And, I guess that fact is possible in a lot of sports, but, I think it gets magnified in basketball vs. baseball, hockey, football, soccer (which all for various reasons, the games are just naturally "closer" during most of the game more of the time anyway... and their ref's have much less ability to "control" the flow of a game than basketball).

IMO, the NBA might be better off going to a more "electronic" ref'ing system...... have the ref's on the court, and they get a "button" they press when they believe a foul was committed.   Each ref also has a fish eye camera they wear, that a booth operator is watching, and someone in the booth is also watching a "close up" TV style camera, and they are have "foul" buttons as well.   A foul is only called if TWO of any of those people (between the court ref's and the video ref's) hit the foul button in a certain time frame (within 1-1.5 seconds lets say)... that maybe makes something the ref's wear "buzz", and they know to blow the whistle then.   Granted... if there is a concerted effort to "manage" games by ref's, it could still be done with more ref's doing it that way, but, if we think it is just too much control by single ref's, an "instant committee" solution might be better.


Good god.
 
2013-11-11 12:38:14 PM  

Primitive Screwhead: What gives? I thought they were tanking this season?


Apparently Brad Stevens didn't get the memo.
 
2013-11-11 01:11:28 PM  

dletter: IMO, the NBA might be better off going to a more "electronic" ref'ing system...... have the ref's on the court, and they get a "button" they press when they believe a foul was committed. Each ref also has a fish eye camera they wear, that a booth operator is watching, and someone in the booth is also watching a "close up" TV style camera, and they are have "foul" buttons as well. A foul is only called if TWO of any of those people (between the court ref's and the video ref's) hit the foul button in a certain time frame (within 1-1.5 seconds lets say)... that maybe makes something the ref's wear "buzz", and they know to blow the whistle then. Granted... if there is a concerted effort to "manage" games by ref's, it could still be done with more ref's doing it that way, but, if we think it is just too much control by single ref's, an "instant committee" solution might be better.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-11-11 01:39:43 PM  

dletter: The feeling I get with the NBA is that the ref's probably DO try to "control" games more than they should, but, not from a "trying to get a certain team a win" standpoint like most people tend to think, but, more of a "when possible, try to get a game to be 'interesting' in the final 6 minutes" sort of action, almost like the ref's are the "NBA Jam Auto-compensate" for the league's interests.   I mean, if an NBA team could have just about every game comfortable and be winning by at least 6-8 points in the final 3 minutes and basically have the game under "control"... that makes for very "dull" games overall, over the course of the season... it is exciting for the team's fans, but, ultimately doesn't provide any game drama, which is what the LEAGUE needs... the team, if they are winning comfortably 90% of games, their fans are happy, that's all they care about.

And, I guess that fact is possible in a lot of sports, but, I think it gets magnified in basketball vs. baseball, hockey, football, soccer (which all for various reasons, the games are just naturally "closer" during most of the game more of the time anyway... and their ref's have much less ability to "control" the flow of a game than basketball).

IMO, the NBA might be better off going to a more "electronic" ref'ing system...... have the ref's on the court, and they get a "button" they press when they believe a foul was committed.   Each ref also has a fish eye camera they wear, that a booth operator is watching, and someone in the booth is also watching a "close up" TV style camera, and they are have "foul" buttons as well.   A foul is only called if TWO of any of those people (between the court ref's and the video ref's) hit the foul button in a certain time frame (within 1-1.5 seconds lets say)... that maybe makes something the ref's wear "buzz", and they know to blow the whistle then.   Granted... if there is a concerted effort to "manage" games by ref's, it could still be done with more ref's doing it th ...


You're looking at this all wrong. Best solution is to require the refs to bet on the games, then make their bets public. It cuts down on the unjustified "OMG the refs hate us" conspiracy theory crying, since, for example, everyone will know which ref is dying for the Sixers to cover that game. Also, it'll add an element of suspense to the otherwise boring regular season. For example, "Ref A and B bet the under on tonight's Boston/Minnesota game, and they're about to go over with about 4 minutes remaining. How will the refs prevent another point from being scored?"

Food for thought.
 
2013-11-11 04:47:25 PM  

dletter: Dr_luckyz: Palmer Eldritch: I'm a Celtics fan, trust me, we're not making the playoffs this year. Beating Miami once in the regular season means nothing. We're just going to build up our rookies and wait out the Humphries and Wallace contracts.


I agree with everything you say except the bold part, I wouldn't be shocked to see them land a 7 or 8 seed despite their mediocrity.

Yeah, the east always seems to be very mediocre around 6-10th place... anyone who is around that level can get one of those last 2-3 spots, and it is just kind of a crapshoot.  (which those teams right now lately have been Atlanta, Boston, Milwaukee, Philly, Toronto, Detroit).


Not this year, its in their best interests to be awful.  If they start showing any more signs of competitiveness they'll just trade away whoever is playing well.
 
2013-11-12 11:57:49 AM  
Well, Miami sure had a number of ways to win that game, and every one of them had to fail for the loss. I wouldn't count on lightning striking all that much again.
 
Displayed 20 of 20 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report