The Knicks have played well on the road in the playoffs, 2-1 in CLE last year and 2-1 against PHI. They’re a completely different team without Anunoby but IND IMO will have all the pressure on them in game 3.
New York Knicks (2) vs Indiana Pacers (6) - 2024 EC Second Round
- Thread starter InstaFace
- Start date
The Pacers just don’t have the ability to pickup the defensive intensity and shut down teams. When they have lulls on offense, it goes to shit for them. They are an exciting young team, but they are not close to a formidable playoff team IMO. You have to be able to play defense and not count on winning 130-125 games.
With that said, the banged up Knicks stink too. The Celtics will destroy them. Let Brunson get 40 and just shut down Hart/Divencenzo and make sure everyone is crashing the boards.
With that said, the banged up Knicks stink too. The Celtics will destroy them. Let Brunson get 40 and just shut down Hart/Divencenzo and make sure everyone is crashing the boards.
Dude. No. Brunson is the king of New York by a country mile. And he is quite literally Aaron Judge in almost every way in terms of character. Hart is beloved as well, but I'm telling you, Brunson is the second coming over here.
Starks averaged 3.3 boards per 36 minutes over his career (3.2 playoffs) in an era with abundant bricks and rebounding opportunities..
In a much more efficient era, Hart has pulled 8.2 boards per 36 over his career in the regular season and 8.9 in the playoffs.
Not that I'm complaining, but the Heat without Butler, the Cavs without Allen (and just in general), and the Knicks without Randle/OG is a historically easy potential road to the finals. These teams aren't even very good if fully healthy. The 2 most likely contenders (Phi/Mil) flopped also. It's pretty wild.
Pacers crying about officiating. Carlisle talking about videos of Hart on twitter trying to hurt players....give me a godamn break.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Rick Carlisle opened his press conference tonight with a two-and-a-half-minute monologue about officiating.<br><br>Pacers disputed 29 calls in Game 1 but didn't submit.<br><br>They'll send Game 2 calls to the league.<br><br> <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeVorkunov?ref_src=twsrc^tfw">@MikeVorkunov</a><a href="https://t.co/BW1qRasE6x">pic.twitter.com/BW1qRasE6x</a></p>— The Athletic (@TheAthletic) <a href="View: https://twitter.com/TheAthletic/status/1788410254826549570?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
">May 9, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Rick Carlisle opened his press conference tonight with a two-and-a-half-minute monologue about officiating.<br><br>Pacers disputed 29 calls in Game 1 but didn't submit.<br><br>They'll send Game 2 calls to the league.<br><br> <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeVorkunov?ref_src=twsrc^tfw">@MikeVorkunov</a><a href="https://t.co/BW1qRasE6x">pic.twitter.com/BW1qRasE6x</a></p>— The Athletic (@TheAthletic) <a href="View: https://twitter.com/TheAthletic/status/1788410254826549570?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
">May 9, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Last edited:
Basketball gods are currently working on taking out the WC next. Luka looks done, Murray is a shell of himself……only has to take care of Ant and SGA now.
Yeah this won't be the Celtics only chance, but it's hard to envision a clearer path to the finals ever again. Not that they didn't earn it with their historical regular season (and with the number of times they've come up just short in the last 7-8 years), and whomever they face in the finals will likely be a chore, pending additional injuries.
LeBron had some very easy paths to the Finals during his second stint in CLE, when 3 of the top 4 or 4 of the top 5 teams were in the West.
Knicks have scored 72 and 67 points in the two second halves of this series so far, that is incredible for a team that plays as many offensive-challenged players as they do.
Knicks have scored 72 and 67 points in the two second halves of this series so far, that is incredible for a team that plays as many offensive-challenged players as they do.
Celtics path to the finals isn't just easy, their path through the finals is easy. This is maybe the easiest path anyone could have imagined for them. The Knicks were gonna be underdogs no matter what but I think they would give the Celtics their first real "test" of the postseason. Provided OG is back. If OG is not, it's gonna be tough for the Knicks to find a way to fill that gap. Really impossible actually.
This is probably just me, but IMO there is no enjoying the playoffs when you're the favorite (and haven't won in recent history). Every win is boring and expected, every loss is disastrous and embarrassing. That's kind of the case with any title or bust team, but given how close Boston has come the last few years and how impressive their regular season was, this Celtics team will be remembered either as choking losers or historically great champions. I'll smile after wins and may even have a happy hour or two after a series victory, but it's hard to get too high at any point before they lift the trophy because I'm well aware of the fact that if they end the year with a loss, anything good is wiped away.
This x100. The only thing I can equate it to as a Boston sports fan was Patriots heading into the Super Bowl in 2014 after the Deflategate allegations broke, whets yurts was the feeling that, if we didn't win it all, the offseason national narratives about "cheaters blah blah blah!" might literally drive me out of sports fandom for a while. For a postseason where we're 4-1 with a +20 point differential, it hasn't been a whole lot of fun so far.
Old Rhode Island native (but no longer RI resident) here. I'm retired and have had a lot of fun watching these playoffs, even the clunkers. The two games in this series have been wildly entertaining. They've also caused me to reminisce about the games I've watched over 60+ years and think about how much the sport has changed in that time. The game itself has always been entertaining: talented athletes performing at the highest degree of skill. I absolutely loved playing myself (until I turned 50 and started getting hurt as soon as I walked on a court) and that's probably one reason I've enjoyed watching. It seems to me that the current generation of professional basketball players is faster, more talented, more athletic, and better conditioned than ever before. I also think they are, overall, physically larger. The things that these guys can do on a routine basis are just stunning. And I certainly don't mean to disrespect the WNBA, but the NBA is a much higher level of the sport. Think about it, those of you who are my age (you young pups are all spoiled. Now get off my lawn!). When I was in junior high and high school, Bob Cousy's occasional behind the back pass was a big deal. When somebody who wasn't as tall as Wilt dunked, that was a rarity to be celebrated. Jimmy Walker, back in his Providence College days, was the first player I saw gain an advantage one-on-one by performing a between-the-legs crossover dribble. These actions were often derided as showboating. Now they're normal, even for high school players. Guards who are 6'7", 6'8" or even taller are common. Seven-footers bring up the ball, make acrobatic passes and take (and make) threes. What has happened?
For one thing, the game has expanded explosively world-wide. More people are playing, trying different sorts of things (example: I first encountered the Euro-step when I was in the Army playing against a friend who was born in Italy. I called him for travelling. He explained to me why it was not). The skill level necessary to perform at the college level (let alone the NBA) has also increased dramatically.
The enormous increase in NBA salaries (enabled by the concurrent increase in the popularity of basketball) over the years has also accelerated the development of the sport. Players now have the leisure to develop their skills to the highest degree possible. The don't have to have other jobs to maintain a comfortable lifestyle.
The laws of physics, biophysics, and biochemistry remain the same, but are better and more widely known than ever, permitting these skilled athletes to receive specialized conditioning programs that help them become faster, jump higher, and play at a high level of effort for longer periods of time.
Coaching is better. Coaches are not necessarily any more intelligent than their predecessors, but they have far more technical tools at their disposal. Coaching staffs are also bigger. More people studying more things than ever before possible raises the overall level at which the sport can be taught to players. Players and coaches are human, and therefore flawed creatures, all subject to discernible tendencies and occasional brain-locks. Makes for endless thread entries full of howling gibberish and living rooms and dens with broken TV sets.
The league has also changed the rules of the sport, smartly, I think, overall, to adapt to the physical development of its players. I'm old enough to remember when what we now call "the paint" used to be known as "the key," and really did look like a keyhole. I think the most dramatic changes have been due to the addition of the three-point shot. I also regard this as a positive development. I think the league has nicely balanced the skills of the players and the constraints within which they operate (i.e., the rules of the game) to create a marvelously entertaining sport.
I love basketball, and yes, I am entertained. (I'm also long-winded, as you may have noticed). Every game has its "How the heck was he able to do that?" moment. Life is good (and will be better when the Cs hang #18).
For one thing, the game has expanded explosively world-wide. More people are playing, trying different sorts of things (example: I first encountered the Euro-step when I was in the Army playing against a friend who was born in Italy. I called him for travelling. He explained to me why it was not). The skill level necessary to perform at the college level (let alone the NBA) has also increased dramatically.
The enormous increase in NBA salaries (enabled by the concurrent increase in the popularity of basketball) over the years has also accelerated the development of the sport. Players now have the leisure to develop their skills to the highest degree possible. The don't have to have other jobs to maintain a comfortable lifestyle.
The laws of physics, biophysics, and biochemistry remain the same, but are better and more widely known than ever, permitting these skilled athletes to receive specialized conditioning programs that help them become faster, jump higher, and play at a high level of effort for longer periods of time.
Coaching is better. Coaches are not necessarily any more intelligent than their predecessors, but they have far more technical tools at their disposal. Coaching staffs are also bigger. More people studying more things than ever before possible raises the overall level at which the sport can be taught to players. Players and coaches are human, and therefore flawed creatures, all subject to discernible tendencies and occasional brain-locks. Makes for endless thread entries full of howling gibberish and living rooms and dens with broken TV sets.
The league has also changed the rules of the sport, smartly, I think, overall, to adapt to the physical development of its players. I'm old enough to remember when what we now call "the paint" used to be known as "the key," and really did look like a keyhole. I think the most dramatic changes have been due to the addition of the three-point shot. I also regard this as a positive development. I think the league has nicely balanced the skills of the players and the constraints within which they operate (i.e., the rules of the game) to create a marvelously entertaining sport.
I love basketball, and yes, I am entertained. (I'm also long-winded, as you may have noticed). Every game has its "How the heck was he able to do that?" moment. Life is good (and will be better when the Cs hang #18).
This isn’t a joke. Brian Windhorst just now on ESPN said the Pacers were up all night compiling clips and found 49 calls they felt were against them. They sent them into the league along with the 29 from Game 1.
I’d just send a million illegal screens from the two games that weren’t called and play those against the insanity from the end of game one.
I agree that some calls haven't gone Indy's way, but if this is how you're spending your time and where your head is at, you're already in Cancun.
Hart's on-off is fairly easy to calculate too and pretty significant!
I think Lowe mentioned that NYK are leading the playoffs in transition points.
Only 49? Are they sure there weren't 1200, counting microaggressions?
Carlisle didn't seem to be upset until they conferenced and waived a double-dribble that clearly didn't happen. He immediately went on to get 2 techs after that, which combined with the usual intentional fouls at the end of the game, form the entire Game 2 free-throw differential. So if they had kept the incorrect double-dribble call, would we be all good here?
This nonsense worked super-well for the Rockets when they used to do this. /s
The point raised in the article asks why they didn’t conference over the clearly blown kick call? The inconsistency from minute to minute and game to game is kinda brutal.
Well, clearly they got that kickball call wrong. Maybe no other ref saw it well enough to overturn, or maybe being in MSG caused them to not conference, or maybe they had money on game 1. Why don't they conference and fix every incorrect call?
In the end, Hartenstein didn't double dribble, and apparently that was the tipping point.
Win also said that he believes that this is also due to the fact that given the injuries Indy doesn’t believe the series is over and wants to push every button for games 3 and 4.
The push by Hart against TH in transition was blatant. Not sure he was trying to hurt him, but definitely should have been a foul
Carlisle said as much in his presser. Gotta do what you gotta go to get the better whistle in the next game.
I'm old enough and butthurt enough to still remember a deciding 2nd round playoff game 6 from about a decade ago between these very same Knicks and Pacers.
The Knicks lost 106-99, and in the process shot 18 free throws. The Pacers shot 46 free throws.
Yes, that was a more perimeter-oriented Knicks team and the Pacers were bigger, but this was that magical moment when Roy Hibbert had invented nuclear fusion ("going straight up"), discovering that almost nothing he did would be called a foul. He played 42 minutes in a physical game and got called for 2 fouls. Weird that that discovery wore off the next year.
The Knicks actually attempted more 2 point shots in that game than the Pacers (and 18 more shots in total), yet were called for 18 more fouls and received 28 less free throws.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201305180IND.html
That kinda sucked at the time. If a similar result had happened in this game, I think there would be an official league investigation into it. They might change the L2M report into the L48M report just to parcel out blame.
The Knicks lost 106-99, and in the process shot 18 free throws. The Pacers shot 46 free throws.
Yes, that was a more perimeter-oriented Knicks team and the Pacers were bigger, but this was that magical moment when Roy Hibbert had invented nuclear fusion ("going straight up"), discovering that almost nothing he did would be called a foul. He played 42 minutes in a physical game and got called for 2 fouls. Weird that that discovery wore off the next year.
The Knicks actually attempted more 2 point shots in that game than the Pacers (and 18 more shots in total), yet were called for 18 more fouls and received 28 less free throws.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201305180IND.html
That kinda sucked at the time. If a similar result had happened in this game, I think there would be an official league investigation into it. They might change the L2M report into the L48M report just to parcel out blame.
lol
Interesting to think about. Not even sure who the 8th guy would be
Top 7 is what? Brunson, Haliburton, Hart, Donte, Siakam, Hartenstein, Turner. 8th guy would be??? Toppin
Having grown up in New England and lived in NYC for 30 years, I have a good perspective on the New York fan.
IMO of all the teams in New York, the one that the city holds closest to its heart is the Knicks. All of the teams have their fanatics, especially the Rangers, the Yankees obviously have the pedigree, but the Yankees aren't the heart and soul of the city. If anything their history counts against them, the sense of entitlement is corrosive. If there is one team for New York it is the Knicks.
If/when the Knicks ever win the title again it's going to be bedlam here.
Yeah, I would hope everyone can agree (even Knicks fans) that it is incomprehensibly unfair and unreasonable to take two similarly-situated and obviously wrong calls and treat them differently in terms of 'review' (even if just a referee huddle). It's pretty much beyond question.
Now, what I think the league would say to Carlisle privately is that the screwup in game 1 was they should have huddled and fixed the call, and so they told the refs to do so in game 2 and thus, process-wise, what happened was correct even if inconsistent. That won't feel good to Pacers, but it is 'fair' in that the league hopefully is trying to get the calls right on the floor and the huddle in game 2 let them do so.
I believe Carlisle and Pacers are appropriately trying to pressure league/officials into better whistle for them in game 3. Teams do this all the time, in different ways...from the Morey (and now Pacers) send in clips and talk about it, to the Phil Jackson/Spo "talk about it in press conferences" to the very common "team sends video clips to league, has a call, and doesn't tell media about it" that regularly goes on as well. I don't know if it will work - my view is historically it sometimes visibly does and other times does not.
I don't think the league is biased towards the Knicks. I do think the officiating in this series has been awful - game 1 was a joke, and while game 2 was better it was only ok. So across these two games, Pacers have gotten materially impacted by less balanced whistle....not becuase of ref intent, but because 1) Knicks benefit when allowed to be more physical 2) Brunson is by far the best actor/foul conjurer in this series and 3) random variance of blown calls. Pacers likely do better on 3, and they are trying to impact 2 and to a degree 1 with the video clips. To me, it's all part of the game in the playoffs
I have two words for you: Hostile Crowd
They are going to be primed & on top of the zebras from the tip.
Good luck Scott Foster, Zach Zarba, etc that is an assignment no Ref wants.
MSG has been full for decades even when the knicks have sucked… they last won a title the year I was born.
The Yankees and their fans still think they’re the winning team they used to be pre 2000.. and make fun of their rival who actually still win WS titles every once in a while.. they make fun of the green monster while moving their fences in to the proportions of a little league park. There’s also the Mets tho so they can’t be the team of the city.
The knicks only have the Nets (who weren’t an official NY team til recently) to compete with. The other teams have another team that divides the city. I’m sure the amount of Knick gear people are wearing is off the charts tho.. New Yorkers love a good band wagon.
This is correct. The Yankees are wife material. They raised the kids, they are appreciated, they pay the bills and make the doctors appointments and everyone loves them and realizes how important they are. The Knicks are the one that got away that New Yorkers will leave their wife for immediately.
This is peak message boarding. Do better dude.
also, https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/40111250/pacers-file-complaint-78-calls-nba-source-says
The part of the double dribble call that sucked was that Hartenstein was dribbling and looked to be heading into a trap… the call and the subsequent reversal changed that entire possession.
Also that the crew said it was an inadvertent whistle.. even though the ref that blew his whistle also, apparently, inadvertently made the motion for a call of a double dribble.. which is why it wasn’t reviewed?
Are you a dope? I lived in nyc for 18 years.
Not sure why you feel so entitled around here.
Not a new yorker nor have I ever been married but this still made complete sense to me. Well done. New Yorkers seemed primed to leave their wife for one fun month of Jeremy Lin for .500 ish team!
Sure, certainly unfair, but the implied remedy (at least Carlisle's implication) of intentionally screwing up the double dribble call to be consistent seems silly to me.
What was unfair was that they got the kickball wrong. It was just a crap call and they didn't expend the energy to fix it.
They can't video review this type of call (either kick or double dribble). All they can do is huddle. And once they huddle, all they can do is go wtih initial call, or say "inadvertent whistle" and have a jump ball (or have a team retain possession, possibly, if clear).
So the 'inadvertent' is just a way of explaining it, not an actual statement of reality
I agree---they had the right process game 2, even if the same team benefitted as the mistake in game 1.
As a married new yorker, that was an easy choice for me. The Yankees had been good but slightly boring since 09, and the Knicks had mostly been terrible + embarrassing for 12 years. Lin was young and good looking and made me feel something.
Plus I mean it was the baseball offseason at the time, the wife was basically gone on a research trip to Antarctica, and also she was Arod. I needed someone authentic to give my time to.
Whoever it was with the whistle obv screwed up big time. I think what Carlisle was arguing is that he DID blow the whistle to indicate he saw the double dribble and who are the other two refs to tell him that he didn’t? He wanted them to force NY to use a challenge at that point for this reason.
My question is….what the heck did he see to call the double dribble? I know game speed on the floor is a different world than replays on our couch….but lol, double dribble?
I don't believe you can challenge a double-dribble call. Or a kicked-ball call. So part of what frustrated Carlisle was that in back to back games there were obviously awful calls made live which he cannot cause review of. And in one case they huddled and got it right and in the other they didn't.
I have zero idea what he saw on that whistle for the double dribble---it did not seem at all like one live to me.
Porzingis is the guy that people wanted Turner to be, back when trading for Myles was all the rage