What's new
By:

Do the Refs Determine the outcome of most NBA games?

I don't think the refs have to be very heavy-handed to have a significant impact on a game. Just like a coach calls a time out to stop momentum the refs can easily put the breaks on by calling a little tighter on one end than the other for just a few possesions. Not only is there a real impact on the scoreboard but a player picking up an extra foul they don't deserve can change the lineup/matchups as well as make a team question the way they are playing the other team and "adjust" accordingly. The refs have a sort of butterfly effect on the game. If NBA refs had integrity then a blown call here or there would be just part of the game, but when blown calls are part of the plan, even if it's just 2-3 calls a game, then the NBA is rigged.
 
Lakers_Slapper said:
Just last week when the Heat played the Lakers, the ref's paved the way for a Laker W right from the tip off. Dwayne Wade was had out for by the officials. And towards the end they were calling a foul If anyone exhaled breath in the direction of Kobe. There were enough bad calls and No calls that I wouldn't be able to count them on fingers and toes. Shane Battier obviously blocked Kobe's turn around shot in the 4th and the 3 blind mice blew the whistle. That was just one of many plays but it makes me think of what I read in Tim Donaghy's book about his days officiating the NBA. That is still happening! And when a player speaks out (Derrick Rose) they are fined at least 25k. That's a steep fine for someone telling just a fraction of the truth behind a game.
Click to expand...

Wade and LeBron get tons of calls, I'm guessing either you are wrong, or it was an abberation.
 
NotDeadYet said:
Yes.
Juest Ask Rick Adelman, who was flat robbed when he was coaching Sacramento Kings vs the LA Lakers in the playoffs a few years ago. Perhaps the most infamous game 6 ever!
Click to expand...

The Kings were one of the best flopping and cheating teams of all time, and got many more calls in their favor in that series than the Lakers.
 
Anything that may be done would have to done unilaterally. I'll never believe there's closed-door meetings dictating who should win and who shouldn't.. because that's just dumb.
 
Hantlers said:
Books presented as non-fiction are always 100% true. Always.
Click to expand...

ostrich-head-in-sand.jpg
 
Conspiracy? According to Justin Wolfers, a professor of business and public policy at Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, the answer is that it's highly likely the games are fixed.

He did detailed statistical analysis over 16 years and 44,120 games. The favored teams were given the edge. And that's where the money is. Can you detect the edge when the Jazz are playing great and the Lakers win anyway? It's common. They use terms like home cooking, and super star to justify bad calls. And teams on the road are always so tired.

They cleaned up Pro Tennis.
 
Want to make money? Just bet on favored NBA teams. You can't lose over time. You can even bet online. Tens of Billions are spent on NBA betting and this system is rigged. You just need to find the primer.
 
I believe that an occasional game may be fixed (the fore-mentioned 3pointer/2pointer against the Bulls). Plus Karl Malone did mention the finals in his recent Monson interview (https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?8635-Mailman-on-1280-The-Zone-))/page3&highlight=1280).

On a side note, I find that since I'm hoping the Jazz get the two lottery picks this year I don't get as upset about bad calls made by the refs. When I attend the games, I do want to see a win, so it's a struggle between wanting them to win and wanting the lottery picks.
 
craig2112 said:
Did you ever read Tim Donahy's book? Might want to check it out.
Click to expand...
No but I know the jist of it. He hardly alluded to a conspiracy. He covered spreads by knowing the tendencies and biases of officials for/against particular players, teams, coaches, home, and away. Conspiracy by the league was just knowing where to send what crews where.

I don't really doubt that there's something to that. However, teams earn their place in the pecking order. It's also worth noting that basketball is one of the hardest to call sports (but I know that doesn't stop the NCAA from calling MUCH better games).

Better teams win more games than worse teams. The argument posed, by extension, is saying the Wizards or Bobcats might be as good or better than most NBA teams. Or that the Timberwolves were anything other than a joke all of this time. That's just not the case.

Someone will also have to explain to me the particular interest the NBA would have in a team like San Antonio being one of the most successful teams in the history of the league. I'm not saying they're a small-market, but they're not a big one. On that note, a really big reason the premier markets in the NBA have the lion's share of titles is because they got into the league earlier (thus developing a tradition and deep-rooted resources) and players tend to migrate to those markets. Let's not forget that Lu Alcindor forced his way out of Milwaukee (after winning it all there) to the Lakers.

Synopsis: I'm not saying there isn't an obvious inequity in how things in this league works. I'm just saying that the system is far from perfect but that being good at basketball is STILL ultimately the heart of the matter.
 
P.S. Bavetta certainly deserves a check from Chicago in '98 if he didn't actually receive one.
 
NUMBERICA said:
P.S. Bavetta certainly deserves a check from Chicago in '98 if he didn't actually receive one.
Click to expand...

...true dat! By the way, ref's have been determining the outcome of games and even how they are played since they stopped calling palming, traveling, hanging on the rim, allowed hand checking, cross over dribbling....and did I miss anything else?
 
I've written about this before, but since the topic came up...

Most of the time the refs don't determine who wins and loses NBA games. The best team (which often has the best players) win the games they deserve to. However - with certain officials in certain circumstances, there's no doubt in my mind they can and have done their best to sway the outcome. I think the officials who do this have two different motives:

1) The officials who operate in the "best interest of the league."
This is Bob Delaney and Dick Bavetta swinging Game 6 of the 2001 WCF between the Kings & Lakers to force a Game 7. For Jazz fans, this is Bob Delaney swinging Game 5 of the 2008 Conference Semis between the Jazz and Lakers, and Delaney again swinging Game 3 of the '08 1st-round matchup with Houston to prolong that series. Similar with Danny Crawford and the 2006 Finals between the Mavs & Heat, and Bavetta in Game 6 of the '98 Finals.

A relative phenomen of this is "star calls." Officials operate knowing that it's in the league's best interest if the Kobes, LeBrons, and Wades score a ton of points - and if they get a few extra free throws that a Paul Millsap normally wouldn't get - in the big picture that's viewed as being "in the best interest of the league." It's much more legendary and marketable if Jordan hits the series-winning jumper over Russell, rather than be called for an offensive foul.

2) The second reason officials swing games is they have a personal agenda.
In Game 4 of the 2007 WCF - Steve Javie took it personally when the crowd and a few Jazz players got on him for calls early in the game - and by the 4th-quarter he was ready to call anything and everything against Utah. IMO that is just Javie being Javie - he's just a jerk. I've seen Kenny Mauer and Joey Crawford react similarly, if you push the wrong buttons they will do their best to screw you over the rest of the game.

So do the refs determine the outcome of most games? No, but they can and have influenced the outcome of several important ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top