PDA

View Full Version : 7-2 could be 3-6!



yancem
02-11-2008, 09:33 AM
For all of the pre-season talk about how dominate UNC was going to be this year and how they might run the table in the acc, their 7-2 record could very easily be 3-6. Besides their 2 loses to MD and Duke, they have had two acc games go to overtime and 2 other games decided by made/missed last second shots. In those six games their average margin a victory is -1 (I only assigned a 1 point victory for the overtime games because giving a team a double digit victory for a game that was dead even after 40 minutes doesn't seem right). Their overall margin for victory for acc games is +7 ppg. That is far from dominate especially since their two losses and 1 overtime game came in Chapel Hill.

I realize that Lawson has missed 3 of those games (I count FSU as a miss since he only played 4 minutes) but even still, those are not overly impressive numbers for a team that was picked pre-season #1 and a favorite to win the NC. I wonder if they are not quite as good as everyone thought or if something is a miss up on the hill. It will be interesting to see how the close games effect them come tourney time. All of these close games have to make them mentally stronger and give them confidence in close games but they can also be mentally/physically draining, especially the overtime periods. Are the close games a blessing or a sign of troubled seas ahead?

dynastydefender
02-11-2008, 09:38 AM
For all of the pre-season talk about how dominate UNC was going to be this year and how they might run the table in the acc, their 7-2 record could very easily be 3-6. Besides their 2 loses to MD and Duke, they have had two acc games go to overtime and 2 other games decided by made/missed last second shots. In those six games their average margin a victory is -1 (I only assigned a 1 point victory for the overtime games because giving a team a double digit victory for a game that was dead even after 40 minutes doesn't seem right). Their overall margin for victory for acc games is +7 ppg. That is far from dominate especially since their two losses and 1 overtime game came in Chapel Hill.

I realize that Lawson has missed 3 of those games (I count FSU as a miss since he only played 4 minutes) but even still, those are not overly impressive numbers for a team that was picked pre-season #1 and a favorite to win the NC. I wonder if they are not quite as good as everyone thought or if something is a miss up on the hill. It will be interesting to see how the close games effect them come tourney time. All of these close games have to make them mentally stronger and give them confidence in close games but they can also be mentally/physically draining, especially the overtime periods. Are the close games a blessing or a sign of troubled seas ahead?
I lose composure when I only talk about how good UNC is or is going to be. Sorry I can't help!!

OldPhiKap
02-11-2008, 09:39 AM
Don't forget that they lost Frasor, too.

I wish they were 3-6, but the fact is that they have found ways to win those games. Usually by wearing/fouling out the defenders on Hansborough. I think those close games will help them down the stretch, although fatigue may become an issue at the end.

Carolina is a solid offensive team. Defense is more of a question to me. But they are a solid 2 or 3 seed and could pop up higher if they get on a roll and Duke falters (I've got to figure that the ACC will have at least one #1 seed).

throatybeard
02-11-2008, 10:04 AM
They kind of remind me of the way our 2006 team was winning. We had that gaudy record at 27-1, but a lot of people were talking about how it could very easily be 20-8 because we had all these last-second escapes. They're still a very good team, but they do an awful lot of screwing around.

CDu
02-11-2008, 10:07 AM
They kind of remind me of the way our 2006 team was winning. We had that gaudy record at 27-1, but a lot of people were talking about how it could very easily be 20-8 because we had all these last-second escapes. They're still a very good team, but they do an awful lot of screwing around.

There are a few similarities indeed. Beyond the number of close wins, they also are very reliant on two dominant players, and don't have much quality depth. Hopefully, they have the same fate as our 2006 team - losing in the Sweet 16.

yancem
02-11-2008, 10:10 AM
Don't forget that they lost Frasor, too.

I wish they were 3-6, but the fact is that they have found ways to win those games. Usually by wearing/fouling out the defenders on Hansborough. I think those close games will help them down the stretch, although fatigue may become an issue at the end.

Carolina is a solid offensive team. Defense is more of a question to me. But they are a solid 2 or 3 seed and could pop up higher if they get on a roll and Duke falters (I've got to figure that the ACC will have at least one #1 seed).

The loss of Frasor hurts, especially in light of the recent Lawson injury but he is gone for the season and UNC will have to adjust. Actually, I think that Thomas has done an admirable job considering. you can never discount finding a way to win but you can't win all the close games and the best way to avoid a close loss is to not have a close game. You can't always count on the other team missing a layup/jumper/free throw at the end of the game. Nor can you count on your players to always make the last second 3 to win the game.

BigTedder
02-11-2008, 10:29 AM
Don't forget that they lost Frasor, too.

I wish they were 3-6, but the fact is that they have found ways to win those games. Usually by wearing/fouling out the defenders on Hansborough. I think those close games will help them down the stretch, although fatigue may become an issue at the end.

Carolina is a solid offensive team. Defense is more of a question to me. But they are a solid 2 or 3 seed and could pop up higher if they get on a roll and Duke falters (I've got to figure that the ACC will have at least one #1 seed).

they didnt find a way to win the one that mattered....we beat em at HOME!
I dont care if they had Lawson or not an (alleged) #3 team in the country should be able to win without a player. Frasor...honestly...it'd be like Duke complaining they dont have Marty....not that they arent good, both are better than I'll ever be, but, not a solid argument. Wanna talk about a loss...what if Hanstravel went down....?

OldPhiKap
02-11-2008, 10:40 AM
they didnt find a way to win the one that mattered....we beat em at HOME!
I dont care if they had Lawson or not an (alleged) #3 team in the country should be able to win without a player. Frasor...honestly...it'd be like Duke complaining they dont have Marty....not that they arent good, both are better than I'll ever be, but, not a solid argument. Wanna talk about a loss...what if Hanstravel went down....?


I SURE do not want to be in a position of defending UNC. But equating Frasor's role in UNC's team to Marty's in ours is a bit tough for me to do. It is more like when Greg was hurt, and we really did not have a good back-up pg -- I don't remember that season too fondly.

Re: comparing UNC to our 2006 team: good analogy. Although we clearly don't dance on the sideline as well as UNC does. (Honestly, it must give Dean heart tremors everytime he sees that).

RockyMtDevil
02-11-2008, 10:43 AM
I can't believe anyone can blow a 15 point lead with 7:36 left on the clock, and do so rather easily. Either Purnell really is a horrible coach, or Clemson simply has accepted the fact that they are losers. No composure, can't hit free throws, they have no idea what it looks like to milk the clock, my God how difficult is it to play four corners.

What a choke.

Misunderestimated
02-11-2008, 10:48 AM
Its tough to say whether it is an indicator of troubled seas or a blessing. The cliche that "good teams find ways to win games" comes to mind. They have faced adversity and come away with a win in all but 2 contests - the "W" is the ultimate goal anyway, right? I dont think they have the feel of a team that will make a deep run into the NCAA tourney though.

I know some have made an issue of Green's dancing, and it may just be a kid having fun and no big deal, but something about it doesnt sit well with me. The look on the Duke player's (coaches and managers too) faces and their demeanor before and during the game indicated they were on a mission and we're not leaving the DES building without a win. Green and cohorts dancing at tipoff just gave me the indication that the same intensity might not be there - except for Psycho T.

CDu
02-11-2008, 10:52 AM
I can't believe anyone can blow a 15 point lead with 7:36 left on the clock, and do so rather easily. Either Purnell really is a horrible coach, or Clemson simply has accepted the fact that they are losers. No composure, can't hit free throws, they have no idea what it looks like to milk the clock, my God how difficult is it to play four corners.

What a choke.

I'm pretty sure we've had some impressive collapses, too, so let's not get overboard on burying Clemson. And with the pace UNC plays, a 15 point lead is not quite as substantial.

It was a tough, tough loss. But UNC had to play as well as they could for those last 5 minutes or so, and Clemson just had a really bad stretch. It happens. How they bounce back will tell me more about Clemson's coach and team than the ineptitude down the stretch of regulation last night.

ugadevil
02-11-2008, 10:53 AM
I wish they were 3-6, but the fact is that they have found ways to win those games.


I'd say that's the most important part of all of it. They've played well enough at the end of games to get the win. I think the opposite example of an ACC team who has lost all the close games this year has been UVA. That team could very easily have a winning record in conference.

-2 OT losses to Va. Tech
-1 OT loss to Ga. Tech
- 69-67 loss to FSU

Win all those games and they'd be at 5-4, instead of 1-8. Funny how things work out like that.

Latta6970
02-11-2008, 10:53 AM
I can't believe anyone can blow a 15 point lead with 7:36 left on the clock, and do so rather easily. Either Purnell really is a horrible coach, or Clemson simply has accepted the fact that they are losers. No composure, can't hit free throws, they have no idea what it looks like to milk the clock, my God how difficult is it to play four corners.

What a choke.


Yeah I had been keeping tabs on the game and saw UNC was down 15. I thought THIS is the year the record ends! About 7:00 I started getting SEVERE abdominal pains and drove myself to the hospital keeled over and throwing up. After bing diagnosed with a kidney stone and having some nurse try in vain to insert a catheter my night was going great. But I thought to myself, well at least UNC finally lost to Clemson. It wasn't until a male nurse in a UNC shirt informed me the University of Northern Carborro beat Clemson in double OT that I found out. I do think UNC is the better team betweeen the two this year. But if they didn't win in Chapel Hell yesterday and couldn't pull it off durring Carolina's 8-20 season I seriously don't think that record will ever stop growing.....barring some unforseen probation, or mass food poisoning. Even then me thinks their JV team would have enough of the curse on their side to pull out a win over the tigers. :mad: :(

mepanchin
02-11-2008, 10:57 AM
I don't think playing a lot of close games is beneficial for two reasons:

1. It's tiring. Not only physically in that you have to compete for 40 minutes, but mentally because you really have to keep your focus for entire games. The stress of it builds.

2. More importantly, if you play a bunch of close games, it doesn't mean you are a battle hardened team that can win in adversity, it means you are playing a bunch of games about evenly with your opponents - and maybe slightly better. The fact is, most of these opponents are not nearly as talented as UNC and these should be easier wins than they are.

Even with Lawson, UNC played 3 games to a one possession finish in the ACC - only one of which (Clemson) is really justifiable. I like the 2005-06 Duke comparison (especially because that Duke team was inconsistent on defense as this UNC team is) but I also like the Wake 2004-05 comparison: excellent on offense, lackluster on defense. That Wake team got a #2 seed and bowed out in the 2nd round.

Latta6970
02-11-2008, 11:17 AM
I don't think playing a lot of close games is beneficial for two reasons:

1. It's tiring. Not only physically in that you have to compete for 40 minutes, but mentally because you really have to keep your focus for entire games. The stress of it builds.

2. More importantly, if you play a bunch of close games, it doesn't mean you are a battle hardened team that can win in adversity, it means you are playing a bunch of games about evenly with your opponents - and maybe slightly better. The fact is, most of these opponents are not nearly as talented as UNC and these should be easier wins than they are.

Even with Lawson, UNC played 3 games to a one possession finish in the ACC - only one of which (Clemson) is really justifiable. I like the 2005-06 Duke comparison (especially because that Duke team was inconsistent on defense as this UNC team is) but I also like the Wake 2004-05 comparison: excellent on offense, lackluster on defense. That Wake team got a #2 seed and bowed out in the 2nd round.


I agree with Mepanchin and Throaty, the 2006 Duke team is a great example. That year JJ and Sheldon were playing almost every minute of every game Duke was highly ranked all year long. But to be as highly ranked as they were they weren't blowing anyone out and most games weren't decided at least until about 4 minutes to go in a game. By the time Coach K was sure the game was in hand enough to sub JJ or Sheldon, except for keeping them from getting hurt there wasn't much reason. They had played the whole game by that point. I'm not faulting Coach K, and both guys were in prime physical condition. But Duke rode their two thourobreds into the ground that year and when they got into the NCAA's the horse was ready for the glue factory.

That's not to say blowing teams out every game is good either. Duke's 1999 team and UNLV in 1992 kicked but the whole season and were fresh for the tournament. But besides the fact Lawson has been out, UNC has had quite a few close ACC games. (Much more than I would have guessed at seasons start.) I like it because it suggests they might not be quite as good on paper as predicted by the experts. And if nothing else it may mean they are getting every teams best shot the way Duke has for years now. I honestly think after their 8-20 season some schools were more sympathetic to UNC and didn't play them as tough as they would Duke.

By the way, and this has probably been brought up on another thread. But the way Hansblubblub plays position defense (thought he did an excellent job of moving his feet however) and does little to alter or block a players shot over him was something I'd never noticed until the Duke game. Thomas did a good job on several opportunities and made baskets over Tyler. Granted not every inside player is a defensive and offensive force like Sheldon Williams. But his lack of doing anything but hold his ground amazed me and makes me wonder if it's something teams can't exploit the rest of the year. It's almost like he has been told he's too valuable on offense to pick up fouls on defense. That may be true and we know he isn't going to pick up and charge calls or walks for that matter. But unless there was a double team I think Thomas could have scored quie a few more baskets that night and it lets me see yet another reason he isn't an NBA hot prospect.

Classof06
02-11-2008, 11:29 AM
While I believe not having Lawson and Frasor hurts this team (hard to argue otherwise), I don't believe it is as big a problem for UNC as their defense. This team is not defending at a high level right now and I don't think having Ty Lawson would make any difference. UNC beat Clemson because, just in the nick of time, they made a commitment to the defensive side of the ball, plain and simple.

UNC fans can whine about Lawson not being there but they almost lost to Clemson with Lawson and they almost lost the Clemson without Lawson, both games extending beyond regulation. That tells me Lawson's absence is not the root of the problem for this team.

Latta6970
02-11-2008, 11:45 AM
While I believe not having Lawson and Frasor hurts this team (hard to argue otherwise), I don't believe it is as big a problem for UNC as their defense. This team is not defending at a high level right now and I don't think having Ty Lawson would make any difference. UNC beat Clemson because, just in the nick of time, they made a commitment to the defensive side of the ball, plain and simple.

UNC fans can whine about Lawson not being there but they almost lost to Clemson with Lawson and they almost lost the Clemson without Lawson, both games extending beyond regulation. That tells me Lawson's absence is not the root of the problem for this team.

Right as rain. I think their D hurt them against Georgetown last year in the NCAA's and I think ithas hurt them in the close games this year. And since we can't blame Lawson for lack of D, I see nobody else to blame but Roy Williams. Even if he is preaching D, it's not getting through to the players apparently. Last time I saw the coaches messages not getting through to the players Matt Doherty was at the helm and we know what happened with that. Okay, someone start a "Fire Roy Williams" thread! :rolleyes: Do it over at IC and used clear DBR rational and see if we can get the ball rolling!

OldPhiKap
02-11-2008, 11:52 AM
UNC fans can whine about Lawson not being there but they almost lost to Clemson with Lawson and they almost lost the Clemson without Lawson, both games extending beyond regulation. That tells me Lawson's absence is not the root of the problem for this team.

UNC is #1 in offense in the conference but 11th in defense.

(Duke is 2nd in offense and 4th in defense).

http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2007-2008/confldrs.html

strawman
02-11-2008, 12:00 PM
The should have 3 losses, Lawson travelled before he made that pass to Ellington for the last second heave. Of course it didn't get called, much like QT laying on the baseline and pushing the ball back in bounds with the ref staring right at him.

Oh well, that is Clemson's problem, DUKE smoked them on their home court.

BigTedder
02-11-2008, 03:00 PM
The should have 3 losses, Lawson travelled before he made that pass to Ellington for the last second heave. Of course it didn't get called, much like QT laying on the baseline and pushing the ball back in bounds with the ref staring right at him.

Oh well, that is Clemson's problem, DUKE smoked them on their home court.

preach

OldPhiKap
02-11-2008, 03:34 PM
How about that inbounds play off of the guy's face from two feet away? It's one thing to throw it off a guy because you're out of time. It's another to rocket a ball right into a guy's pusser from point blank range. I guess that's just another example of "the Carolina Way" . . . .

Misunderestimated
02-11-2008, 04:01 PM
How about that inbounds play off of the guy's face from two feet away? It's one thing to throw it off a guy because you're out of time. It's another to rocket a ball right into a guy's pusser from point blank range. I guess that's just another example of "the Carolina Way" . . . .

Not so fast...Dahntay used to put the ball down opposing players throats.

Matches
02-11-2008, 04:09 PM
No offense to anyone on the thread, but I'm not sure how productive it is to play the "they could've lost X number of games" thread. We *could* have lost to UNC, BC, Florida State, or Va Tech, and last year's team probably *would* have lost at least 2-3 of those games. The fact that we won games we could have lost is indicative, in part, of good luck, but also the team's toughness and will.

Likewise, UNC's record in close games speaks well of them. Say what you will about Clemson's collapse - but the fact remains UNC hung up 103 points without its playmaker. That's impressive. They are going to be a tough out before all is said and done. Hansbrough in particular is a tough kid who plays REALLY hard every single game.

Ugh - can't believe I said something nice about UNC. I feel dirty now.

OldPhiKap
02-11-2008, 04:24 PM
Not so fast...Dahntay used to put the ball down opposing players throats.

Can't say I'm proud of that, either.

cato
02-11-2008, 04:36 PM
How about that inbounds play off of the guy's face from two feet away? It's one thing to throw it off a guy because you're out of time. It's another to rocket a ball right into a guy's pusser from point blank range. I guess that's just another example of "the Carolina Way" . . . .

Well, it's the most effective way of getting the ball out of bounds off an opposing player. Throw it at his gut, he might catch it. Throw it at his legs, he might jump out of the way. Throw it at his head, it's more likely to bounce off the guy. Not that I condone this (I always cringed when Dahntay did it, not least of all because it has a tendency to get the recipient fired up), but it should be noted that it is not a foul.

CDu
02-11-2008, 05:30 PM
Well, it's the most effective way of getting the ball out of bounds off an opposing player. Throw it at his gut, he might catch it. Throw it at his legs, he might jump out of the way. Throw it at his head, it's more likely to bounce off the guy. Not that I condone this (I always cringed when Dahntay did it, not least of all because it has a tendency to get the recipient fired up), but it should be noted that it is not a foul.

I think it should be a foul. Seems like a pretty dangerous play, and shouldn't be condoned by the NCAA. In the Washington/UCLA game, a Husky player (Morris?) threw the ball directly into Aboya's face on an inbounds play to avoid a 5-second call. It looked REALLY dangerous, and Aboya was lucky he didn't get a broken nose. It's just a low class move.

yancem
02-11-2008, 05:44 PM
No offense to anyone on the thread, but I'm not sure how productive it is to play the "they could've lost X number of games" thread. We *could* have lost to UNC, BC, Florida State, or Va Tech, and last year's team probably *would* have lost at least 2-3 of those games. The fact that we won games we could have lost is indicative, in part, of good luck, but also the team's toughness and will.

Likewise, UNC's record in close games speaks well of them. Say what you will about Clemson's collapse - but the fact remains UNC hung up 103 points without its playmaker. That's impressive. They are going to be a tough out before all is said and done. Hansbrough in particular is a tough kid who plays REALLY hard every single game.

Ugh - can't believe I said something nice about UNC. I feel dirty now.

Apples and Oranges! Duke beat UNC by 9, BC by 10, FSU by 13 and VaTech by 17. They may have been tough games but they weren't decided by one or two plays like the UNC games. That was my point. Yes, UNC's record in close games is impressive, but I would argue that luck plays more of role in a 1-2 point game than a 8-12 point game. UNC is tough and will be a tough out (when you have a first team AA you're almost always a tough out) but they should be dominate and so far they are not. They may get things together by the end of the year like they did in '05. That team also was not as dominate as it should have been but still managed to pull it together to make a NC run. Actually, this has become a bit of a of a trend (FL last year, UNC in '05 and UConn in '04) but I wouldn't want to bank on it.

Also, 103 points isn't quite as impressive when it takes multiple overtimes.

-jk
02-11-2008, 05:54 PM
I think it should be a foul. Seems like a pretty dangerous play, and shouldn't be condoned by the NCAA. In the Washington/UCLA game, a Husky player (Morris?) threw the ball directly into Aboya's face on an inbounds play to avoid a 5-second call. It looked REALLY dangerous, and Aboya was lucky he didn't get a broken nose. It's just a low class move.

As I recall, in the women's game hurling the ball at an opposing player is a violation.

In the men's game, it isn't.

To (mostly) quote Walter Cronkite, "That's the way it is."

Go figure.

regards,

-jk

pfrduke
02-11-2008, 06:06 PM
UNC is #1 in offense in the conference but 11th in defense.

(Duke is 2nd in offense and 4th in defense).

http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2007-2008/confldrs.html

Banish such antiquated thoughts as points per game from your head! They're better indicators of how fast a team plays than how good the offense or defense are. In conference play, Duke is, in fact, #1 in both offense and defense in terms of points per possession. UNC is #2 in offense (I believe) and I think around 4th in defense in conference play.

Latta6970
02-11-2008, 08:17 PM
I think it should be a foul. Seems like a pretty dangerous play, and shouldn't be condoned by the NCAA. In the Washington/UCLA game, a Husky player (Morris?) threw the ball directly into Aboya's face on an inbounds play to avoid a 5-second call. It looked REALLY dangerous, and Aboya was lucky he didn't get a broken nose. It's just a low class move.

A foul? Not condoned? Low class? Okay yes it hurts when the ball smacks off your face, anyone who has PLAYED organized basketball has had it happen. (Intentionally or unintentionally) What hurts worse is your ego when the ball goes out of bounds off you because you were too slow to get your hands up and attempt to catch the ball. It's a smart play despite what anyone here thinks. Cato is 100% correct! As for it being a foul in the womens game well, when our players start wearing skirts it should be a foul in the mens game too. Yes I know the lady devils don't wear skirts and it shouldn't be a foul for them either.

Back in the day me and a 6'6" player were going after a loose ball and the ONLY way I was going to be able to save it was off this guys face due to a high bounce. It smacked off his face hard (you have to throw it hard to make it hard to catch) and my team got the ball. Part of me had a lump in my throat this guy was going to get mad, but he said, "nice play". Players know it's part of the game, spectators that cringe when a player suffers some pain, even a broken nose need to watch syncronized swimming or chess.

gofurman
02-11-2008, 08:24 PM
I'm pretty sure we've had some impressive collapses, too, so let's not get overboard on burying Clemson. And with the pace UNC plays, a 15 point lead is not quite as substantial.

It was a tough, tough loss. But UNC had to play as well as they could for those last 5 minutes or so, and Clemson just had a really bad stretch. It happens. How they bounce back will tell me more about Clemson's coach and team than the ineptitude down the stretch of regulation last night.

This Clemson team will not fade - people said the same after the Ellington shot at LittleJohn...They will be int the tourney with UNC, Duke, and Maryland... they will get at least 8-8- Purnell is a good one

CDu
02-11-2008, 10:33 PM
A foul? Not condoned? Low class? Okay yes it hurts when the ball smacks off your face, anyone who has PLAYED organized basketball has had it happen. (Intentionally or unintentionally) What hurts worse is your ego when the ball goes out of bounds off you because you were too slow to get your hands up and attempt to catch the ball. It's a smart play despite what anyone here thinks. Cato is 100% correct! As for it being a foul in the womens game well, when our players start wearing skirts it should be a foul in the mens game too. Yes I know the lady devils don't wear skirts and it shouldn't be a foul for them either.

Back in the day me and a 6'6" player were going after a loose ball and the ONLY way I was going to be able to save it was off this guys face due to a high bounce. It smacked off his face hard (you have to throw it hard to make it hard to catch) and my team got the ball. Part of me had a lump in my throat this guy was going to get mad, but he said, "nice play". Players know it's part of the game, spectators that cringe when a player suffers some pain, even a broken nose need to watch syncronized swimming or chess.

I disagree wholeheartedly. And I played plenty of organized basketball in my day, and was a pretty good defender. Have you had a guy standing less than two feet away on an inbounds from you throw the ball into your face full force? Try defending that when you aren't expecting it. I'd say the odds are less than 1% that anyone can catch that, because if you're defending properly (i.e., extending your arms to block the passing lanes) there's no way you can get your hands back in time. It doesn't hurt the ego that you didn't block it - it just hurts your face.

Your anecdote does nothing to prove your point. It's not even applicable to the situation. I was talking about an out of bounds play. There are plenty of alternatives. Diving for a loose ball is nothing like an inbounds play. And even then, the fact that the guy you hit happened to be nice enough not to beat the urine out of you doesn't make it universally acceptable. It just means you got lucky.

And your "concern for a broken nose is wimpy" argument is just absurd. Enough with the machismo. Violent acts shouldn't be a part of sports. To say that "it's just part of the game" is an indictment of the game, not an acceptance of the action. It's a dirty, low-class play. You think that, because a guy's team is playing great defense, you have the right to throw the ball at his face? That's a ridiculous caveman-ish point of view. It's a low class, dangerous, unnecessary, and unacceptable play.

Latta6970
02-12-2008, 03:17 AM
I disagree wholeheartedly. And I played plenty of organized basketball in my day, and was a pretty good defender. Have you had a guy standing less than two feet away on an inbounds from you throw the ball into your face full force? Try defending that when you aren't expecting it. I'd say the odds are less than 1% that anyone can catch that, because if you're defending properly (i.e., extending your arms to block the passing lanes) there's no way you can get your hands back in time. It doesn't hurt the ego that you didn't block it - it just hurts your face.

Your anecdote does nothing to prove your point. It's not even applicable to the situation. I was talking about an out of bounds play. There are plenty of alternatives. Diving for a loose ball is nothing like an inbounds play. And even then, the fact that the guy you hit happened to be nice enough not to beat the urine out of you doesn't make it universally acceptable. It just means you got lucky.

And your "concern for a broken nose is wimpy" argument is just absurd. Enough with the machismo. Violent acts shouldn't be a part of sports. To say that "it's just part of the game" is an indictment of the game, not an acceptance of the action. It's a dirty, low-class play. You think that, because a guy's team is playing great defense, you have the right to throw the ball at his face? That's a ridiculous caveman-ish point of view. It's a low class, dangerous, unnecessary, and unacceptable play.


There is intentional intent to harm off someones face and there are also situations where it is the ONLY play that can be made. If the ball has bounced high enough in the air any player would be a fool to try and bounce the ball off an opposing players legs, chest etc. How many basketball games have we all watched a player throw the ball back inbounds under their own basket for an easy layup for an opposing player. It's VERY similar and the risks are VERY similar when trying to throw the ball off someones feet / legs. Most people here remember Jason Richardson bouncing the ball off Carlos Boozers forehead in the NBA rookie game a several years back. THAT was low class with intent to humiliate, but not harm. I've seen plenty of players get ticked off when another player bounces the ball off their head / face. But it is TOTALLY legal, most of the time smart because a player is less likely to catch it and sometimes the only play that can be made.

Call me caveman, neanderthal, overly machismo and any other terms you'd like to come up with, I care not. But your quote, "Try defending that when you aren't expecting it" proves exactly why it works. And for that matter when it gives the player attempting it the best chance of hitting the ball off the opposing player without him / her catching it......why would you not be expecting it? I've seen loose balls going out of bounds so many times when one player knows if the ball goes out his team will get the ball. I've seen players try to screen opposing players away from reaching the ball using elbows, forearms etc. to keep the opposing player away. But in your book that contact must be fine. But God forbid the player gets by all those screening techniques and hits it off a players face / head.

Please tell me, is there anywhere that is okay to hit a ball off an opposing player. I mean in reality if you throw a ball as hard as you can, anywhere it hits is going to hurt, maybe even injure. Throw it hard enough and you could probably take out a kneecap, break a rib etc. If you have played like you say you have I'm sure you've tried to catch a bullet pass and jammed / broken a finger. Injuries are going to happen, and I'd much rather see a player trying to hit the ball off an opposing player (ANYWHERE on that player) than the jumping up, grabbing the ball and calling time out in mid air. (Why waste a time out you could use and may need later?)

In an out of bounds play it's pretty cheap to bust a guy in the mouth, gut, junk etc. I agree with that much. But then again I remember Len Bias bouncing a ball off a UNC player for an easy dunk in Carolina's first Dean Dome loss. If I recall correctly it hit off the players back and wasn't too hard a hit. But who's to say it couldn't rupture a disc or throw a spine out of whack in a different situation. And I've seen players guarding the inbounds pass jump up and get busted in all kinds of sensitive areas when the inbounding player was trying to pass past them. I have seen heated college games (old Big East basketball) where an out of bounds player intentionally busted the guarding player in the mouth / face. A technical was called in every instance, and yes a fight or two broke out. It really boils down to "intent" and how the refs see things. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm not changing your mind and you aren't changing mine.