NBA Playoffs 2022

[HayYou]

Its as if the teams figure they only have so much ammunition to expend and when they see a game going south they pull back and save it all for the next game. It does make some sense as far as avoiding injury and staying fresh, but it sure doesn't help psychologically. It drives the fans nuts too.

I don't think a more tightly-called game would result in more free throws, at least if all concerned stuck to their guns. These are the best basketball players on the planet. They would adjust. They've been making in-game adjustments all their lives

Oh, they're calling that. Well, I guess I'll just stop doing that. Call hand checks and defenders will stop hand checking.

The problem is, there are plenty of guys in the league, some of whom are playing key roles in the conference finals, who will do so again in the Finals finals, that play physical. That is "all" they bring to the table. Sure, they are better basketball players than 99% of humanity, but the league is full of guys who are better at hoops than 99.999% of humanity. I'm talking about guys who cannot shoot or pass well enough to get on the court in an NBA game for a bottom feeder, much less a title hopeful. But these guys make up for it with defense and rebounding. But it is physical defense and physical rebounding. They are more like Football players. They sacrifice long term health to play 8-12 years in the NBA, and the last years are usually spent mostly on the bench while they ride out their last contract. If lucky, they can go be physical in Europe or China for a few more years after that.

But for the guys who play like this, the switch you are talking about will essentially end their NBA careers.

I have doubts that they'll just take that lying down.

We have all complained about UVA's reputation for "great defense." They play extremely physical, especially with their lower bodies wherein they basically dry hump ball handlers (phrasing) and steer the dribbler into traffic, at which point the UVA defense collapses, and pushes or pulls the dribbler's hands off the ball, or into a bad shot. All while being praised for defending without fouling.

But they are fouling. Bennett implemented this style of play when he got to UVA, and UVA was terrible. Refs in the ACC were essentially forced into a position where they had 2 choices: Let UVA foul and not call it. Which was appealing because back then UVA was terrible, and who cared?

Choice 2 was to call all the fouls. Combined with UVA's anemic offense, the end result would've been 2.5 hour games, played in the mid 60s, with UVA's opponent shooting 40+ FTs. I'm sure ESPN would've loved that. So the refs swallowed their whistles. But they kept doing it even when UVA got better. This is why UVA has had so much trouble with Duke and UNC when either school is even close to their historical standard. The refs don't let them get away with as much, and UVA's offense can't make up the difference. It is why UVA has had so little success in the NCAAT, with their lone title coming because Hunter had a late season injury, which kept him in school an extra year, and it still required an absurd late game call for UVA to win their title. In the NCAAT, UVA commits a bunch of fouls, which are promptly called by non conf refs, and UVA goes down before the Elite Eight of the NCAAT most years.

Rough players in the NBA will do the same. Teams that have no chance of winning a skill and athleticism based contest will simply play rough and dare the refs to call all the fouls. As others have said, no one wants a FT shooting contest. So physical teams will dare the refs to officiate such an event. NBA's media partners will LOSE THEIR MINDS after a few double headers played in the mid 90s after the game goes for nearly 3 hours.

Unless the NBA instructs refs to start being very liberal with ejections, it will be hard to implement. It will take a few years otherwise, and those few years will be rough as players learn to play without the physical play. And plenty of teams, who are currently depending on physical play to make the playoffs, will be set back to zero. They'll be so bad in the short term that any quality players will bail in free agency. Teams currently constructed around physical play will be set back a decade or more in pursuit of being title worthy, barring the emergence of a LeBron or Durant type of talent before then, and it would require luck to get that guy.

It is easy to say "clean up the physical play." But guys who depend on playing rough, and teams that do so, are not going to simply lay down and cheerfully accept the end of their careers, be it playing, coaching, or in the front office.

[darthur]

The problem is, there are plenty of guys in the league, some of whom are playing key roles in the conference finals, who will do so again in the Finals finals, that play physical. That is "all" they bring to the table. Sure, they are better basketball players than 99% of humanity, but the league is full of guys who are better at hoops than 99.999% of humanity. I'm talking about guys who cannot shoot or pass well enough to get on the court in an NBA game for a bottom feeder, much less a title hopeful. But these guys make up for it with defense and rebounding. But it is physical defense and physical rebounding. They are more like Football players. They sacrifice long term health to play 8-12 years in the NBA, and the last years are usually spent mostly on the bench while they ride out their last contract. If lucky, they can go be physical in Europe or China for a few more years after that.

But for the guys who play like this, the switch you are talking about will essentially end their NBA careers.

I have doubts that they'll just take that lying down.

I think you may be over-estimating the power these players have.

It also seems a bit harsh -- why is physical toughness less of a basketball skill than other things? It's part of the game and has been for many years. It's also not so far off from effort, which I think is something we can all respect at Duke right?

Agree with the points about injuries though...

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The problem is, there are plenty of guys in the league, some of whom are playing key roles in the conference finals, who will do so again in the Finals finals, that play physical. That is "all" they bring to the table. Sure, they are better basketball players than 99% of humanity, but the league is full of guys who are better at hoops than 99.999% of humanity. I'm talking about guys who cannot shoot or pass well enough to get on the court in an NBA game for a bottom feeder, much less a title hopeful. But these guys make up for it with defense and rebounding. But it is physical defense and physical rebounding. They are more like Football players. They sacrifice long term health to play 8-12 years in the NBA, and the last years are usually spent mostly on the bench while they ride out their last contract. If lucky, they can go be physical in Europe or China for a few more years after that.

But for the guys who play like this, the switch you are talking about will essentially end their NBA careers.
I have doubts that they'll just take that lying down.

Physical defense and rebounding are absolutely fundamental parts of basketball. I get that you seem to want free-flowing ball, jumpshots, dunks, and layups, but trying to eliminate "physical defense and rebounding" is getting rid of 2/3rds of the sport.

And yeah, there are guys who are great basketball players who are average shooters that built their careers on physical defense and rebounding. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Despite what you may think, a team with five Steph Currys would not be very good or very entertaining.

Okay, bad example - I would totally watch. But you get my point.

We have all complained about UVA's reputation for "great defense." They play extremely physical, especially with their lower bodies wherein they basically dry hump ball handlers (phrasing) and steer the dribbler into traffic, at which point the UVA defense collapses, and pushes or pulls the dribbler's hands off the ball, or into a bad shot. All while being praised for defending without fouling.

I've absolutely not complained about UVA's reputation for great defense. They play great defense. Why would I complain about their reputation as such? They are frustrating to play because they are disciplined and well-coached and frequently play much better than us.

I mean, I might "complain" about their great defense like I "complain" historically about UNC's size and offensive rebounding. But honestly, I admire both. When a team excels at something for years, it's impressive.

Physicality is part of the sport. I have no problem with refs tightening things up to keep injuries from occuring - that's fine. But pretending that basketball isn't a contact sport and that defense and rebounding shouldn't be physical... go YouTube Bulls/Knicks playoff games. Or some 80s Big East basketball in the six fouls era or slightly before.

Here's my over the top analogy - "Hockey needs more flow on offense, they should eliminate goalies."

[ClemmonsDevil]

Physical defense and rebounding are absolutely fundamental parts of basketball. I get that you seem to want free-flowing ball, jumpshots, dunks, and layups, but trying to eliminate "physical defense and rebounding" is getting rid of 2/3rds of the sport.

And yeah, there are guys who are great basketball players who are average shooters that built their careers on physical defense and rebounding. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Despite what you may think, a team with five Steph Currys would not be very good or very entertaining.

Okay, bad example - I would totally watch. But you get my point.



I've absolutely not complained about UVA's reputation for great defense. They play great defense. Why would I complain about their reputation as such? They are frustrating to play because they are disciplined and well-coached and frequently play much better than us.

I mean, I might "complain" about their great defense like I "complain" historically about UNC's size and offensive rebounding. But honestly, I admire both. When a team excels at something for years, it's impressive.

Yeah I don't complain about it. I love watching UVA play defense. It's a master class. Same with traditional UNC teams when they have great PG play and rebound like their lives depend on it. I don't think UVA fouls all the time and I love watching them. And the argument that UVA hasn't had success in the tournament and the reason why (if you assume the hypothesis that they have struggled in the tournament...and I don't) being their defense is conjectural. It's ok if someone doesn't like watching them. Many on here don't. I don't think it's fair to be reductive. UVA is a GREAT program.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yeah I don't complain about it. I love watching UVA play defense. It's a master class. Same with traditional UNC teams when they have great PG play and rebound like their lives depend on it. I don't think UVA fouls all the time and I love watching them. And the argument that UVA hasn't had success in the tournament and the reason why (if you assume the hypothesis that they have struggled in the tournament...and I don't) being their defense is conjectural. It's ok if someone doesn't like watching them. Many on here don't. I don't think it's fair to be reductive. UVA is a GREAT program.

Many teams would love to have UVA's tournament "struggles."

[Steven43]

Yeah I don't complain about it. I love watching UVA play defense. It's a master class. Same with traditional UNC teams when they have great PG play and rebound like their lives depend on it. I don't think UVA fouls all the time and I love watching them. And the argument that UVA hasn't had success in the tournament and the reason why (if you assume the hypothesis that they have struggled in the tournament...and I don't) being their defense is conjectural. It's ok if someone doesn't like watching them. Many on here don't. I don't think it's fair to be reductive. UVA is a GREAT program.

I’m honestly perplexed by the consistent negativity towards UVA and the way they play. Of the many times I’ve watched them over the past 10 years I don’t recall ever thinking anything worse of the experience than that of any other team. In fact, I look forward to watching UVA because they value the basketball, they always seem to play hard, and they tend to take well-designed, thoughtful shots.

UVA plays under the same shot clock rules as everybody else. It’s not like they are allowed to stand around passing the ball outside the three-point line just letting minutes of time melt away like Dean Smith (and many others) used to do. Maybe there’s something about them that I’m just not seeing. 🤔

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I’m honestly perplexed by the consistent negativity towards UVA and the way they play. Of the many times I’ve watched them over the past 10 years I don’t recall ever thinking anything worse of the experience than that of any other team. In fact, I look forward to watching UVA because they value the basketball, they always seem to play hard, and they tend to take well-designed, thoughtful shots.

UVA plays under the same shot clock rules as everybody else. It’s not like they are allowed to stand around passing the ball outside the three-point line just letting minutes of time melt away like Dean Smith (and many others) used to do. Maybe there’s something about them that I’m just not seeing. 🤔

I know lots of people who find the pacing tedious. That is a question of taste I suppose. Some folks don't like defensive football either - I enjoy a 10-6 slugfest. It isn't objectively horrible.

[bundabergdevil]

Many teams would love to have UVA's tournament "struggles."

Seriously. There have been about 80 championships and a handful of teams have won most of them. UVA isn’t in that crowd but they HAVE won one and that’s something hundreds of other schools cannot say.

[tommy]

The problem is, there are plenty of guys in the league, some of whom are playing key roles in the conference finals, who will do so again in the Finals finals, that play physical. That is "all" they bring to the table. Sure, they are better basketball players than 99% of humanity, but the league is full of guys who are better at hoops than 99.999% of humanity. I'm talking about guys who cannot shoot or pass well enough to get on the court in an NBA game for a bottom feeder, much less a title hopeful. But these guys make up for it with defense and rebounding. But it is physical defense and physical rebounding. They are more like Football players. They sacrifice long term health to play 8-12 years in the NBA, and the last years are usually spent mostly on the bench while they ride out their last contract. If lucky, they can go be physical in Europe or China for a few more years after that.

But for the guys who play like this, the switch you are talking about will essentially end their NBA careers.

I have doubts that they'll just take that lying down.

We have all complained about UVA's reputation for "great defense." They play extremely physical, especially with their lower bodies wherein they basically dry hump ball handlers (phrasing) and steer the dribbler into traffic, at which point the UVA defense collapses, and pushes or pulls the dribbler's hands off the ball, or into a bad shot. All while being praised for defending without fouling.

But they are fouling. Bennett implemented this style of play when he got to UVA, and UVA was terrible. Refs in the ACC were essentially forced into a position where they had 2 choices: Let UVA foul and not call it. Which was appealing because back then UVA was terrible, and who cared?

Choice 2 was to call all the fouls. Combined with UVA's anemic offense, the end result would've been 2.5 hour games, played in the mid 60s, with UVA's opponent shooting 40+ FTs. I'm sure ESPN would've loved that. So the refs swallowed their whistles. But they kept doing it even when UVA got better. This is why UVA has had so much trouble with Duke and UNC when either school is even close to their historical standard. The refs don't let them get away with as much, and UVA's offense can't make up the difference. It is why UVA has had so little success in the NCAAT, with their lone title coming because Hunter had a late season injury, which kept him in school an extra year, and it still required an absurd late game call for UVA to win their title. In the NCAAT, UVA commits a bunch of fouls, which are promptly called by non conf refs, and UVA goes down before the Elite Eight of the NCAAT most years.

This has not in fact been the case. Here are some facts about UVA's NCAAT losses under Bennett:

2012: #10 UVA loses 71-45 to #7 Florida. UVA is whistled for 15 total fouls, with only one player getting as many as four. Shooting 38%, including 16% from 3, which is why they scored only 45 points, was the issue, not fouling.

2014: #1 UVA loses in Sweet 16 to Michigan State by a bucket. Each team was whistled for 16 fouls, and UVA had nobody with more than three. Michigan State had two guys with four.

2015: #2 UVA upset in the second round, again by Michigan State,60-54. UVA had one starter foul out, and two other guys with four. MSU also had two guys with four. UVA was doomed by its shooting 30% from the field, including 12% from 3 point land.

2016: UVA loses in the Elite Eight to Syracuse. UVA was whistled for 16 total fouls, with nobody getting more than three. Syracuse had one starter foul out. UVA shot poorly in the second half, Syracuse caught fire and made a big comeback to win it, fueled by Virginia's uncharacteristic turnovers.

2017: UVA has another offensive stinker, losing to Florida 65-39. Yes the Cavs had one player foul out and another with four, but the issue was the team shooting 29% from the field, and 6% from three -- they made one three pointer all day.

2018: the historic loss to UMBC, in which UVA did have a player foul out and another with four, but still only 16 team fouls. The difference was UMBC making 12 three pointers of 24, while UVA only made 4 of 22, UVA only getting 5 assists all night, and UMBC killing them on the boards.

2021: #4 UVA upset in the first round by Ohio, 62-58. UVA only had one player with as many as four fouls. Again, poor shooting and being beaten on the boards cost the Cavs much more than foul trouble.


Bottom line: UVA loses because they can't shoot. Not because they get in foul trouble all the time.

[elvis14]

This has not in fact been the case. Here are some facts about UVA's NCAAT losses under Bennett:

2012: #10 UVA loses 71-45 to #7 Florida. UVA is whistled for 15 total fouls, with only one player getting as many as four. Shooting 38%, including 16% from 3, which is why they scored only 45 points, was the issue, not fouling.

2014: #1 UVA loses in Sweet 16 to Michigan State by a bucket. Each team was whistled for 16 fouls, and UVA had nobody with more than three. Michigan State had two guys with four.

2015: #2 UVA upset in the second round, again by Michigan State,60-54. UVA had one starter foul out, and two other guys with four. MSU also had two guys with four. UVA was doomed by its shooting 30% from the field, including 12% from 3 point land.

2016: UVA loses in the Elite Eight to Syracuse. UVA was whistled for 16 total fouls, with nobody getting more than three. Syracuse had one starter foul out. UVA shot poorly in the second half, Syracuse caught fire and made a big comeback to win it, fueled by Virginia's uncharacteristic turnovers.

2017: UVA has another offensive stinker, losing to Florida 65-39. Yes the Cavs had one player foul out and another with four, but the issue was the team shooting 29% from the field, and 6% from three -- they made one three pointer all day.

2018: the historic loss to UMBC, in which UVA did have a player foul out and another with four, but still only 16 team fouls. The difference was UMBC making 12 three pointers of 24, while UVA only made 4 of 22, UVA only getting 5 assists all night, and UMBC killing them on the boards.

2021: #4 UVA upset in the first round by Ohio, 62-58. UVA only had one player with as many as four fouls. Again, poor shooting and being beaten on the boards cost the Cavs much more than foul trouble.


Bottom line: UVA loses because they can't shoot. Not because they get in foul trouble all the time.

It's not that UVa loses because they can't shoot (that's true but less important), it's that they win because the commit uncalled blocking fouls all game long.

[budwom]

I don't want to get into this excellent debate, but do wish to point out that when rules enforcement was a bit different, Duke took advantage and played a much more physical brand of ball than is allowed now...lots of people didn't like it, but it was effective.

[elvis14]

I don't want to get into this excellent debate, but do wish to point out that when rules enforcement was a bit different, Duke took advantage and played a much more physical brand of ball than is allowed now...lots of people didn't like it, but it was effective.

That's the truth, there have been times when we were better in the tournament because we started playing football.

To bring this back around to the actual playoffs: I'm really happy for Klay Thompson after last night's breakout performance. He has really been through a lot the last 2 years and it's good to see him back on the court. One thing I've noticed is that he is a shoot first, second and third player so when he is on he makes a huge impact. When he is off...he still keeps shooting and it can be a problem. Anyway, on to the finals for the GSW and now we get to see if Tatum can bring Boston to the finals as well.

[budwom]

That's the truth, there have been times when we were better in the tournament because we started playing football.

To bring this back around to the actual playoffs: I'm really happy for Klay Thompson after last night's breakout performance. He has really been through a lot the last 2 years and it's good to see him back on the court. One thing I've noticed is that he is a shoot first, second and third player so when he is on he makes a huge impact. When he is off...he still keeps shooting and it can be a problem. Anyway, on to the finals for the GSW and now we get to see if Tatum can bring Boston to the finals as well.

I would love to see Boston vs GS with both teams healthy...

[tommy]

It's not that UVa loses because they can't shoot (that's true but less important), it's that they win because the commit uncalled blocking fouls all game long.

Your opinion as to why UVA wins may or may not be supportable. But regardless, it’s irrelevant to the point of my post, which was to point out that the poster to whom I was responding was wrong when he asserted that UVA gets bounced from the NCAAT when and because the refs start calling them for a lot of fouls that they had gotten away with during the regular season. His assertion is belied by the facts, which show that foul trouble has rarely been a significant factor in their NCAAT losses. Poor shooting almost always has been.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

This has not in fact been the case. Here are some facts about UVA's NCAAT losses under Bennett:

2012: #10 UVA loses 71-45 to #7 Florida. UVA is whistled for 15 total fouls, with only one player getting as many as four. Shooting 38%, including 16% from 3, which is why they scored only 45 points, was the issue, not fouling.

2014: #1 UVA loses in Sweet 16 to Michigan State by a bucket. Each team was whistled for 16 fouls, and UVA had nobody with more than three. Michigan State had two guys with four.

2015: #2 UVA upset in the second round, again by Michigan State,60-54. UVA had one starter foul out, and two other guys with four. MSU also had two guys with four. UVA was doomed by its shooting 30% from the field, including 12% from 3 point land.

2016: UVA loses in the Elite Eight to Syracuse. UVA was whistled for 16 total fouls, with nobody getting more than three. Syracuse had one starter foul out. UVA shot poorly in the second half, Syracuse caught fire and made a big comeback to win it, fueled by Virginia's uncharacteristic turnovers.

2017: UVA has another offensive stinker, losing to Florida 65-39. Yes the Cavs had one player foul out and another with four, but the issue was the team shooting 29% from the field, and 6% from three -- they made one three pointer all day.

2018: the historic loss to UMBC, in which UVA did have a player foul out and another with four, but still only 16 team fouls. The difference was UMBC making 12 three pointers of 24, while UVA only made 4 of 22, UVA only getting 5 assists all night, and UMBC killing them on the boards.

2021: #4 UVA upset in the first round by Ohio, 62-58. UVA only had one player with as many as four fouls. Again, poor shooting and being beaten on the boards cost the Cavs much more than foul trouble.


Bottom line: UVA loses because they can't shoot. Not because they get in foul trouble all the time.

Oh you and your pesky accurate facts that don't match the narrative of someone else!

*Shakes his fist*

[rsvman]

Yeah, UVA's approach to basketball always fails come tournament time, until it doesn't.

Admittedly, my memory is not as good as it once was, but i seem to recall that they won the tournament at some point? Again, I could be wrong.

[cato]

This has not in fact been the case. Here are some facts about UVA's NCAAT losses under Bennett:

2012: #10 UVA loses 71-45 to #7 Florida. UVA is whistled for 15 total fouls, with only one player getting as many as four. Shooting 38%, including 16% from 3, which is why they scored only 45 points, was the issue, not fouling.

2014: #1 UVA loses in Sweet 16 to Michigan State by a bucket. Each team was whistled for 16 fouls, and UVA had nobody with more than three. Michigan State had two guys with four.

2015: #2 UVA upset in the second round, again by Michigan State,60-54. UVA had one starter foul out, and two other guys with four. MSU also had two guys with four. UVA was doomed by its shooting 30% from the field, including 12% from 3 point land.

2016: UVA loses in the Elite Eight to Syracuse. UVA was whistled for 16 total fouls, with nobody getting more than three. Syracuse had one starter foul out. UVA shot poorly in the second half, Syracuse caught fire and made a big comeback to win it, fueled by Virginia's uncharacteristic turnovers.

2017: UVA has another offensive stinker, losing to Florida 65-39. Yes the Cavs had one player foul out and another with four, but the issue was the team shooting 29% from the field, and 6% from three -- they made one three pointer all day.

2018: the historic loss to UMBC, in which UVA did have a player foul out and another with four, but still only 16 team fouls. The difference was UMBC making 12 three pointers of 24, while UVA only made 4 of 22, UVA only getting 5 assists all night, and UMBC killing them on the boards.

2021: #4 UVA upset in the first round by Ohio, 62-58. UVA only had one player with as many as four fouls. Again, poor shooting and being beaten on the boards cost the Cavs much more than foul trouble.


Bottom line: UVA loses because they can't shoot. Not because they get in foul trouble all the time.

Bottom bottom line: UVA often wins despite their anemic offense. But they lose in the NCAA when they put together the lethal combination of failing to score AND failing to defend. When March rolls around, too many times UVA will face a team they can’t stop enough to make up for their offensive shortcomings.

A one and done tourney is a cruel mistress.

[cato]

Not sure how I got dragged into a UVA conversation in the NBA playoffs thread, but who you got tonight? My heart says Celtics but my head says the Heat aren’t ready for golf and beach vacations just yet.

I think Miami wins what will finally be a close one.

[Steven43]

Bottom bottom line: UVA often wins despite their anemic offense. But they lose in the NCAA when they put together the lethal combination of failing to score AND failing to defend. When March rolls around, too many times UVA will face a team they can’t stop enough to make up for their offensive shortcomings.

A one and done tourney is a cruel mistress.

Pretty much every school loses in the March/April tournament every year, including our beloved Duke. So….

[bundabergdevil]

Pretty much every school loses in the March/April tournament every…. So….

I’d say all but 1. 😁

Yeah, I posted earlier that there have been around 80 total NCAA championships and a big % have been won by a small number of schools. UVA is one of the few schools out of the remaining hundreds that have at least 1 championship. They’re very hard to come by so I suspect they’re pretty happy.