Guest STL10 Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 (edited) 1985 Draft LotteryThe true reason for Jordan's "retirement"2002 Western Conference Finals2006 East Conference Finals2006 NBA Finals Inexpert Opinion on the matterWhy the NBA was declining... Use an open mind when looking at this. I'm not calling you stupid for saying your favorite sport could be fixed. OPEN MINDED PLEASE! Edited August 14, 2010 by STL10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Penny Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 (edited) some of these don't make any sense. the '85 draft lottery i couldn't see anything wrong... 2006 EC finals, the Pistons still won the game... so it was a terrible 'fix' and yeah, the 2002 WC finals GAme 6 was fishy... but everyone seems to forget game 5 (probably because it favoured the Kings)Bryant led the Lakers with 30 points but missed a potential game winner; replays tended to show Bobby Jackson clearly grabbing his jersey on the shot, although no foul was called.[7] O'Neal had 28 points, but did not take a shot in the 4th quarter and fouled out; interestingly, O'Neal attempted only one free throw the entire game, despite attempting 18 field goals. For the game, the Kings enjoyed a significant free throw advantage, attempting 33 to the Lakers 23.[8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOtJCgsSmYc4:20 and onwards... so if the NBA was fixed, it was simply to push the series to 7 games, and contrary to popular opnion they didn't favour anyone. point is refs make bad calls... they're human. i see things when i'm watching when i think "WTF!!! thats a foul" and it isn't when i see the replay. i also see things when i think "c'mon ref, man up." but i see the replay and it's a clear foul... also, a couple of those "rip off" calls were legit fouls. Edited August 14, 2010 by PiLR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deestillballin Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 I agree 2006 NBA Finals was fixed... and im not saying this becaue I am a Mavs fan, I love Wade, IMO he really should have been ROY in 2003, but cmon anybody with 20/20 vision can see that this was fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 The 85 lottery was definitely fixed, you can see the bent corner easily and the way he put that one in makes it kinda obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRV Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 LMAO, the 85 draft was pretty funny. Also, I don't get why the NBA would rig the 2006 finals for the Heat either way, we were pretty much an irrelevant franchise. The Mavs absolutely raped us the first two games, so it would have made more sense to screw us over and let the Mavs win it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 (edited) The 2008 finals was definitely fixed, holla at cha boi. And the Lakers - Kings was fair BECAUSE all 3 wins for each team going into game 7 were fixed, and game 7 the better team won. Edited August 14, 2010 by kingfish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdog17k Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 The '02 WCF were a disgrace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest STL10 Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 The '02 WCF were a disgrace. I wanted to throw my [expletive]ing control through the TV. That was some Bull[expletive]! Any Laker fan with 2 eyes could see that [expletive]! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted August 14, 2010 Owner Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 Sky (a member here, one of the most intelligent posters I know) already put those rumors about the 2002 WCF to sleep. If that one game was fixed, so was the other that gave the Kings a victory. Nobody wanted to comment on what he said, though, because it basically made people look stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted August 14, 2010 Owner Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 By the way, just an observation over the years...the referees called about 75% of the fouls made on Shaq in almost every game he played in during the dynasty (his most dominant years). Sacramento was one of the teams fouling him every possession that ended up in his hands, while San Antonio didn't have to go to that extreme due to their defensive-minded frontcourt. Had they called all of the fouls in that series, the Lakers probably win in six. As a Laker, up to the 2002 Playoffs... 1997 Playoffs, FTA: 11.71998 Playoffs, FTA: 12.21999 Playoffs, FTA: 14.82000 Playoffs, FTA: 12.92001 Playoffs, FTA: 12.52002 Playoffs, FTA: 10.9 (third year of dynasty) And... GM1 vs. SAC: 6 FTA, 21 FGAGM2 vs. SAC: 11 FTA, 27 FGAGM3 vs. SAC: 6 FTA, 20 FGAGM4 vs. SAC: 13 FTA, 22 FGAGM5 vs. SAC: 1 FTA, 18 FGA (one? really?)GM6 vs. SAC: 17 FTA, 25 FGAGM7 vs. SAC: 15 FTA, 25 FGA Anyone grow suspicious when they saw the Kings take 35 free throws in Game 3? The Lakers took 15, just eight between Kobe and Shaq despite both players taking a combined 44 of the team's 101 FGA. What about the 2-3 games Sacramento was racking up 30+ FTA? GM1: LAL 22, SAC 17 (+7)GM2: SAC 38, LAL 25 (+13) GM3: SAC 35, LAL 15 (+20) GM4: LAL 27, SAC 26 (+1)GM5: SAC 33, LAL 23 (+10) GM6: LAL 40, SAC 25 (+15)GM7: LAL 33, SAC 30 (+3) But everyone looks at that Game 6 because Shaq was getting to the line, and because there's a big "40" plastered into the statsheet. Did anyone care that the Thunder had 48 free throw attempts in Game 4 against us last season? Get over it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest STL10 Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 By the way, just an observation over the years...the referees called about 75% of the fouls made on Shaq in almost every game he played in during the dynasty (his most dominant years). Sacramento was one of the teams fouling him every possession that ended up in his hands, while San Antonio didn't have to go to that extreme due to their defensive-minded frontcourt. Had they called all of the fouls in that series, the Lakers probably win in six. As a Laker, up to the 2002 Playoffs... 1997 Playoffs, FTA: 11.71998 Playoffs, FTA: 12.21999 Playoffs, FTA: 14.82000 Playoffs, FTA: 12.92001 Playoffs, FTA: 12.52002 Playoffs, FTA: 10.9 (third year of dynasty) And... GM1 vs. SAC: 6 FTA, 21 FGAGM2 vs. SAC: 11 FTA, 27 FGAGM3 vs. SAC: 6 FTA, 20 FGAGM4 vs. SAC: 13 FTA, 22 FGAGM5 vs. SAC: 1 FTA, 18 FGA (one? really?)GM6 vs. SAC: 17 FTA, 25 FGAGM7 vs. SAC: 15 FTA, 25 FGA Anyone grow suspicious when they saw the Kings take 35 free throws in Game 3? The Lakers took 15, just eight between Kobe and Shaq despite both players taking a combined 44 of the team's 101 FGA. What about the 2-3 games Sacramento was racking up 30+ FTA? GM1: LAL 22, SAC 17 (+7)GM2: SAC 38, LAL 25 (+13) <--- rigged?GM3: SAC 35, LAL 15 (+20) <--- rigged?GM4: LAL 27, SAC 26 (+1)GM5: SAC 33, LAL 23 (+10) <--- rigged?GM6: LAL 40, SAC 25 (+15)GM7: LAL 33, SAC 30 (+3) But everyone looks at that Game 6 because Shaq was getting to the line, and because there's a big "40" plastered into the statsheet. Did anyone care that the Thunder had 48 free throw attempts in Game 4 against us last season? Get over it. What you just showed me is that the NBA is FIXED. Thank you sir! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted August 14, 2010 Owner Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 What you just showed me is that the NBA is FIXED. Thank you sir!Actually, I was just looking into the same crystal ball as you conspiracy theorists...but coming up with a different conclusion: LA was getting screwed. So either the NBA is fixed and the Lakers were getting screwed in 2002, or it's not fixed and the referees were calling legit fouls for Shaq in Game 6, and those other games were just called loose. No reason to throw your TV and cry about the Lakers' dynasty. I figured people were over that by now. It was a decade ago. I just hope you're not doing the same thing for this next dynasty. If the NBA is rigged, stop watching it and stop posting about it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 What you just showed me is that the NBA is FIXED. Thank you sir! :lol: Refs are human. MLB on the other hand is rigged, because the commissioner won't use instant replay to ensure that calls are correct. At least the NBA TRIES to get it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRV Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 That 1985 draft video is great though, Stern makes it pretty obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren2ThaG Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 That 1985 draft video is great though, Stern makes it pretty obvious. Shouldn't he be fined? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRV Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 He can do whatever he wants and not get in trouble for it, he has no boss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 By the way, just an observation over the years...the referees called about 75% of the fouls made on Shaq in almost every game he played in during the dynasty (his most dominant years). Sacramento was one of the teams fouling him every possession that ended up in his hands, while San Antonio didn't have to go to that extreme due to their defensive-minded frontcourt. Had they called all of the fouls in that series, the Lakers probably win in six. As a Laker, up to the 2002 Playoffs... 1997 Playoffs, FTA: 11.71998 Playoffs, FTA: 12.21999 Playoffs, FTA: 14.82000 Playoffs, FTA: 12.92001 Playoffs, FTA: 12.52002 Playoffs, FTA: 10.9 (third year of dynasty) And... GM1 vs. SAC: 6 FTA, 21 FGAGM2 vs. SAC: 11 FTA, 27 FGAGM3 vs. SAC: 6 FTA, 20 FGAGM4 vs. SAC: 13 FTA, 22 FGAGM5 vs. SAC: 1 FTA, 18 FGA (one? really?)GM6 vs. SAC: 17 FTA, 25 FGAGM7 vs. SAC: 15 FTA, 25 FGA Anyone grow suspicious when they saw the Kings take 35 free throws in Game 3? The Lakers took 15, just eight between Kobe and Shaq despite both players taking a combined 44 of the team's 101 FGA. What about the 2-3 games Sacramento was racking up 30+ FTA? GM1: LAL 22, SAC 17 (+7)GM2: SAC 38, LAL 25 (+13) <--- rigged?GM3: SAC 35, LAL 15 (+20) <--- rigged?GM4: LAL 27, SAC 26 (+1)GM5: SAC 33, LAL 23 (+10) <--- rigged?GM6: LAL 40, SAC 25 (+15)GM7: LAL 33, SAC 30 (+3) But everyone looks at that Game 6 because Shaq was getting to the line, and because there's a big "40" plastered into the statsheet. Did anyone care that the Thunder had 48 free throw attempts in Game 4 against us last season? Get over it. That's why you watch the games, and don't just go off stats, although stats are very important. I know you're a Laker fan, but that was the most obvious fixed series I have ever seen. It was unbelievably obvious, and the fouls that the Lakers were called for in game 5 were legit, unlike game 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted August 15, 2010 Owner Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 That's why you watch the games, and don't just go off stats, although stats are very important.I did watch the series. I have it on a VHS tape, actually. Watched it again last year. I'm guessing you have it somewhere, also, so go check out how many times Shaq was fouled without a call in the entire series, and how many times Christie hacked away at Bryant in Game 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Penny Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 That's why you watch the games, and don't just go off stats, although stats are very important. I know you're a Laker fan, but that was the most obvious fixed series I have ever seen. It was unbelievably obvious, and the fouls that the Lakers were called for in game 5 were legit, unlike game 6.fine... let's watch the game http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOtJCgsSmYc4:20 and onwards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 Don’t worry, I pride myself in being open minded. I’m always open to being wrong, and in the end, I consider all possibilities before I settle on an answer… but not completely settled. Unfortunately, not many people think this way. Perhaps 1 in 30, as a very rough guess off the top of my head. Anyway, here are my thoughts on each link... 1985 Draft Lottery: Looks like a very possible fix to me. It's hard to accidentally bend a paper, accidentally flip through them and pick the very one that’s bent, and then accidentally smooth out the crease, which just so happens to be a high market team. Thinking up to recent years, it makes me wonder why Stern would allow the Knicks to suck for so many years, if there are still fixes. Perhaps due to the league not being as popular then, it was more important for high market teams to be successful. Jordan's retirement: The writer gives plenty of evidence that Jordan was a big time gambler. However, there is no proof to show that it's the very reason for his retirement. Sure it's possible, but the connection is only the writer's speculation. 2002 WCF: I don’t like it when people try to use music to persuade the audience, first of all. Anyway, it was an extremely poorly reffed game in a very unusually one-sided way. That particular game may have very well been a fix, but for the intent of having 7 games, not for the intent of having the Lakers in the finals over anyone else. I don’t see any fixes in game 7. It’s still no excuse to fix a game, however. 2006 ECF: Lots of questionable calls again. I’m not sure if it proves that the NBA is fixed in any manner or if the ref was making calls in favor of his bet, but it definitely proves that the NBA’s reffing system needs some major improvement… or a major change. 2006 Finals: Wade is a slasher. He’s going to get calls at some point. I see no fixing that game. However, the overall reffing could be much improved. 2008 Finals: Again, there’s no proof to show deliberate fixing. Reffing sucks, that has been established. Inexpert Opinion:: ….who is Rob Kardashian? From what I can tell, he's just a random dude making a claim. No further comment needed. NBA = Declining: Again, the music annoys me… just get to the point. Anyway, I agree with some points made in this video. Simply put, Tim Donaghy sucks and David Stern is a douchebag. And like I've said so many times before, I am ALL FOR freedom of speech in every sense of the word. [expletive] censorship. However, as dramatic as the video puts it, it still doesn’t quite prove the NBA is fixed in any way. It just proves that refereeing is horrible, and that David Stern won't do anything about it and fines away all criticism. And also, something I definitely do not agree with in the video, the NBA is definitely NOT on the decline whatsoever. The game is more popular than ever, and the competition is greater than ever, as well as the overall talent and coaching. The fact that the NBA could potentially become a world-wide league shows that it's heading forward. My conclusion: Overall, I still do not believe the NBA is completely fixed. Perhaps some events here and there, but they don’t appear to predetermine anything, except for the forcing of game 7s as often as possible and favoring certain teams in the NBA lottery. Contrary to my disbelief in the NBA being as fake as pro wrestling, I do believe the NBA’s reffing system needs a major change, and the lottery needs to be thrown out. But since I am truly open minded, I will always be open to the possibility of the NBA being fixed. I just don't feel there is quite enough evidence, though there are clearly issues with the system. David Stern constantly fines and censors people to protect the refs and the image of the NBA. Instead of correcting the problems themselves (mainly the refereeing), he chooses to go into the pockets of those who point the problems out. It almost appears that Stern is trying very hard to hide something. If he wasn't, he'd have no need to censor anyone in the first place. If he wants to prove that the NBA isn’t fixed, he needs to change his ways. He needs to prove to all NBA fans that he IS willing to admit the system is flawed, and that he will work very hard on changing things for the better... which he hasn't even come close to doing. If there is anyone who isn't open minded, it's David Stern. I believe there are ways to improve reffing dramatically, but I’ll share ideas some other time. My post is already too long as it is, and nobody is going to read it as usual. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 who is Rob Kardashian? Lamar Odom's bother in law. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.