What's new
By:

Rigged - Kings vs. Lakers - Game 6

PS
I just skimmed your source.
He said that the Kings got more calls in their favor in game 5.
He also said that the Kings shot 20 more free throws in game 3,
whereas the Lakers shot 15 more freethrows in game 6.

My assertions have been partially validated.
Further validation might be found by looking at the calls in the other games.
 
Last edited:
northeast said:
but the coverage is not looking at all the flopping and calls favoring the Kings in the rest of that game and the rest of that series,
Click to expand...

This is a thing you are baldly asserting with no evidence that the Kings were the primary beneficiaries of poor refereeing throughout the series.

I have the following two points right off the top:

1. Even if true, mildly bad officiating the rest of the series does not in any way cancel out the single worst quarter of officiating in the last decade plus, especially considering that the quarter swung a championship.

2. It's just untrue. Bracketing that single quarter in which the Lakers netted +22 in free throw attempts the foul and free throw totals for the two teams is as follows:

Lakers Fouls: 179 Total. 26.52 fouls per game (If you're checking the math I've divided by 6.75 instead of seven since I have removed one quarter from the stats)
Kings Fouls: 173 Total. 25.63 fouls per game
Difference: 3.35%

Lakers Free Throws: 163 Total. 24.15 per game. (The difference between this number and the 22 cited by Wilbon above is because the Lakers attempted 33 free throws in game 7, tilting the average up)
Kings Free Throws: 198 Total. 29.33 per game.
Difference: 17.68%

Lakers Free Throws per foul called: .877
Kings Free Throws per foul called: 1.14

Looking at those raw numbers the total number of fouls called is virtually even, within one extra foul call per game. The Kings benefit from more fouls being awarded free throws but that doesn't mean anything about favorable refereeing on face.

Compare to the season long numbers, keeping in mind that fouls naturally tend to increase in the playoffs as the games get tighter, defenses more intense, and plays more half-court oriented:

Lakers: 22.23 fouls per game. 8th highest foul rate in the league.
23.08 fouls drawn per game. 5th highest rate in the league.
26.07 free throws attempted per game. 6th highest rate in the league.
25.27 free throw attempts allowed per game. 8th worst in the league.



Kings: 19.02 fouls per game. 3rd lowest foul rate in the league.
22.28 fouls drawn per game. 8th highest rate in the league.
26.29 free throws attempted per game. 5th highest rate in the league.
21.51 free throw attempts allowed per game. 3rd best in the league.



In sum the Lakers were already a high foul team that also drew a lot of fouls and attempted a lot of free throws. They also allowed their opponents to shoot a lot of free throws. Those things didn't change in the playoff series against the Kings.

Conversely the Kings were slightly better than the Lakers at drawing fouls and shooting a high volume of free throws, but throughout the season were a team that committed a very low volume of fouls and allowed few free throws. That trend went the opposite direction throughout the Lakers series, turning one of the top teams at avoiding fouls into a team that was among the highest fouling squads in the NBA. Furthermore that the Kings got more free throws on fewer fouls drawn was true throughout the regular season as well so there isn't any special lesson to be learned from that in the Kings-Lakers series.

As a result I think numbers provide little if any support for your claim and instead demonstrate either a continuation of season long trends throughout the series or, at most, less favorable officiating for the Kings than they were accustomed to throughout the season.

nor is the media making any effort to give similar examination and evaluation to inequities in any other playoff series...
Click to expand...

The most egregious example gets the most attention. Why does this mean that you would defend the refereeing here if it's uniformly bad all the time?

The net effect was forcing the Kings to have to win 5 games out of 7 against the defending champs. That was unfair and relatively unique. You should never defend that game's officiating.
 
my response is my previous post that I made while you were making this one.
At this point I can only repeat myself.
I respect your opinion, and no one is more of an advocate for improving the refereeing than me.
 
ah hell, I lied, after reading your post I have got to highlight this"
So now you are telling us that the Kings shot 35 more free throws in the series?!?!?!?

I agree that the Kings got some bad calls in the 4th quarter of game 6, but not that they got less calls in the series as a whole. I'd have to go back again, but I think it is questionable the Kings were even treated worse for the game 6 as whole , not just the one quarter.

Sorry that the Kings did not get the same calls against the lakers in the playoffs that they did against the Twolves of the league during the regular season. I suspect that the Lakers did what the Jazz never did or could do in similar situations, which was to show the tape to the league and demand that they be treated fairly, and maybe the refs gave the Lakers that one quarter, or at least overcompensated in their desire to be fair.

I don't think it was a well reffed series, but public outrage aside, taken as a whole I don't think the Kings were ripped off more than many other teams in many other series. I'd rather see the refs swing their favor from one team to the other, rather than consistently favor only one team from start to finish.
 
Last edited:
northeast said:
ah hell, I lied, after reading your post I have got to highlight this"
So now you are telling us that the Kings shot 35 more free throws in the series?!?!?!?
Click to expand...

Well no, they actually shot 13 more free throws in the series, but 35 more if we eliminate quarter 4 of Game 6.

So you picked one number without looking at the rest. The real points you're missing are that a) we're bracketing the disputed quarter, b) the number of fouls called on each team was basically even despite the free throw numbers you're now highlighting, and c) we would expect the Kings to foul less and shoot more free throws than the Lakers based upon the numbers. My post is meant to provide the fuller context that you claimed justifies the horrendous quarter. That context indicates that the Kings normal play advantages were entirely wiped out by the officiating.

The two teams were equally as good at drawing fouls and getting to the line throughout the season. The Kings were noticeably better at playing defense without fouling and fouling without allowing free throws.

Based upon the free throw attempts allowed numbers we could reliably expect the Kings to allow the Lakers to shoot 150 or so free throws over seven games.

In paralell we could reliably expect the Lakers to allow the Kings to shoot 177 or so free throws over seven games. So a supposed delta of 35 isn't exactly shocking, we'd predict it to be about 27. It would be far more shocking if the number was even. In reality the number was 13, lower than we'd expect based upon season long trends.

It shouldn't be surprising at all that the Lakers allowed the Kings to shoot more free throws overall. That's what we'd expect based upon those two teams performance. If anything the fact that the gross foul numbers were so close is the surprising part and to the disadvantage of the Kings.

So you've provided no support for the argument you staked your entire claim to: that the Kings received favorable officiating in every spot except for one quarter in Game 6. That's just simply not true.
 
my mistake., didn't catch that.. okay so if you discount that one quarter, the Lakers shot 35 fewer free throws for the rest of the series...
That is still something to consider. I think I provided some support, but I accept that my efforts to persuade you have failed, and concede the battle.
 
I just watched the end of 93 finals game 4.
Jordan with the ball hit Ainge in the face with an elbow.
A foul was called on Ainge. Refs often would call a foul on the guy getting hit with an elbow.
 
Jazzrule's neg rep comment: "Saw that game and you got nothing!"

So you saw the game one time 10 years ago, without going back and reviewing the tape, and you remember everything perfectly?
Did you see it on TV, or in person?
What specifically are you referring to when you say I've got nothin'?
Did you notice that my posts are not about one game, but about the entire series, as compared to other series?
It seem that you have a reading comprehension issue.
 
northeast said:
Ha ha, I actually was somewhat partial to the Kings in that era.
Bobby Jackson was one of my favorite players. I liked Christie standing up to Kobe. I had great respect for Bibby's talent. Divacs was entertaining to watch. I was no fan of Kobe or Shaq. It was a long time ago, so i don't remember, but I probably was sympathetic to the Kings like everybody else during game 6. I'd like to be able to see what I wrote on the message boards at that time.

I think it is only recently when I went back and reviewed the series that I realized that it wasn't just Divacs who flopped , played dirty, cried and got lots of calls, the whole team did.
Click to expand...

I always liked Bobby Jackson as well.
I remember always wishing the Jazz could get Jackson to back up Stockton in those days.
 
^^ yup. I thought the super bowl where the steelers were gifted the win against the cardinals was pretty redic too.
 
northeast said:
Jazzrule's neg rep comment: "Saw that game and you got nothing!"

So you saw the game one time 10 years ago, without going back and reviewing the tape, and you remember everything perfectly?
Did you see it on TV, or in person?
What specifically are you referring to when you say I've got nothin'?
Did you notice that my posts are not about one game, but about the entire series, as compared to other series?
It seem that you have a reading comprehension issue.
Click to expand...

Let me just say I have a masters degree, so I don't think I have a reading comprehension issue. You sir, on the other hand, have a eye sight issue. Anyone that watched that game and did not believe the game was fixed had to be blind in one eye and couldn't see out of the other. I guess a third possible reason is that your a closet Laker homer.
 
Last edited:
That's your opinion, but you don't know why the refs made the calls they did.
It is possible one game was fixed, but you are overlooking any number of other equally plausible explanations.

More importantly, for someone pulling the masters degree card, it sure looks like you are using it as a means to cover up your refusal to read and comprehend the difference between the words "quarter", "game", and "series", or anything else I wrote.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top