Lakers out played the Spurs tonight. Imo, they deserved the win. Of the two shots at the end, Duncan's was tougher.(luckier) Fisher's shot doesn't fall, S.A. feeling pretty good about things. It goes and now the Lakers are squarely in the driver's seat. Fine line out here. Wil, I may have to abandon the Spurs, and join your side.
Overall, Ten of the last 12 meetings have hit at least 180.I'm thinking the games score higher in L.A.
Overall, Ten of the last 12 meetings have hit at least 180.I'm thinking the games score higher in L.A.
its the same thing as any other single bet steve. if you cashed youre sharp, if you lost youre sqaure. the "sharps" earn the nick from collecting and winning more often than others. the "squares" get the knick from losing more often than not.
before a game even goes the sharps will say "this is the sharp side, becuase I'm on it and that is the square side becuase you're on it" well when its over the what the sharp side turned out to be was the one that cashed.
it doesnt matter if its a soft college football line in week 8 or a game 5 in the second round of the NBA playoffs.
im sick of hearing this "sqaure" crap. ..lame buzz word. good for you, you have some gambling vocab.
before a game even goes the sharps will say "this is the sharp side, becuase I'm on it and that is the square side becuase you're on it" well when its over the what the sharp side turned out to be was the one that cashed.
it doesnt matter if its a soft college football line in week 8 or a game 5 in the second round of the NBA playoffs.
im sick of hearing this "sqaure" crap. ..lame buzz word. good for you, you have some gambling vocab.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SHACK:
I must say that that was more than .4. Secondly, the Spurs had a fould to give and Ginobili should of fouled as soon as Fisher caught the ball and the clock would of (or should of been less than .3 left. It was a sorry display by the scorekeeper and bad execution by the Spurs D not to foul before they got the shot attempt.
This entire playoffs no team has made a last second shot tie or win a game and this game had two great last second shots.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I know the Spurs had a foul to give, but I think fouling would've been WAY too risky.
Lots of people are saying that the Spurs should've immediately fouled. But don't forget that the Lakers had to immediately SHOOT.
Get the point? As soon as Fisher touched the ball, he began a shooting motion. If you foul him, you're forcing the ref to decide if it is/isn't a shooting foul.
I'd rather take my chances with a rushed jumper instead of watching the refs give my opponent two free-throws.
If there were a few seconds on the clock (instead of 0.4), then the game totally changes and fouling the Lakers becomes an option.
I must say that that was more than .4. Secondly, the Spurs had a fould to give and Ginobili should of fouled as soon as Fisher caught the ball and the clock would of (or should of been less than .3 left. It was a sorry display by the scorekeeper and bad execution by the Spurs D not to foul before they got the shot attempt.
This entire playoffs no team has made a last second shot tie or win a game and this game had two great last second shots.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I know the Spurs had a foul to give, but I think fouling would've been WAY too risky.
Lots of people are saying that the Spurs should've immediately fouled. But don't forget that the Lakers had to immediately SHOOT.
Get the point? As soon as Fisher touched the ball, he began a shooting motion. If you foul him, you're forcing the ref to decide if it is/isn't a shooting foul.
I'd rather take my chances with a rushed jumper instead of watching the refs give my opponent two free-throws.
If there were a few seconds on the clock (instead of 0.4), then the game totally changes and fouling the Lakers becomes an option.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by wilheim:
Good point Shack, Spurs are supposed to foul instantly, but I quess that is almost impossible in less than half a second. The real culprit is the rule that punishes a great basket by Duncan by letting a time out take the ball all the way into the front court for in-bounding. I have never liked that rule, and I was rooting hard for the Lakers to win on the floor tonight.
wil.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
BINGO!
Another bullshit rule created under the watch of Stern (yep, I'm on a Stern rampage tonight).
Why should a team be allowed to advance the ball to half-court simply by calling a timeout? Where's the logic behind that? It totally violates the "physics" of the game!
But the NBA likes the rule because it artificially increases the chances for a buzzer-beater (as we saw tonight).
Imagine if the NFL had the same rule. If your opponent scores a go-ahead TD/FG in the final 2 minutes, you can elect to get the ball @ the 50-yard line instead of taking the kickoff. How silly would that be? But that's EXACTLY what the NBA has done!
Yet another reason I prefer college hoops. They actually have to EARN their buzzer-beaters. Just ask Valpo and Bryce Drew.
Good point Shack, Spurs are supposed to foul instantly, but I quess that is almost impossible in less than half a second. The real culprit is the rule that punishes a great basket by Duncan by letting a time out take the ball all the way into the front court for in-bounding. I have never liked that rule, and I was rooting hard for the Lakers to win on the floor tonight.
wil.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
BINGO!
Another bullshit rule created under the watch of Stern (yep, I'm on a Stern rampage tonight).
Why should a team be allowed to advance the ball to half-court simply by calling a timeout? Where's the logic behind that? It totally violates the "physics" of the game!
But the NBA likes the rule because it artificially increases the chances for a buzzer-beater (as we saw tonight).
Imagine if the NFL had the same rule. If your opponent scores a go-ahead TD/FG in the final 2 minutes, you can elect to get the ball @ the 50-yard line instead of taking the kickoff. How silly would that be? But that's EXACTLY what the NBA has done!
Yet another reason I prefer college hoops. They actually have to EARN their buzzer-beaters. Just ask Valpo and Bryce Drew.
