GhostAnime 50 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 The biggest flaw in the "Refs forcing game 7" in the finals argument is that there actually haven't been that many game 7's in the finals. Also, how do you explain the Spurs being in the finals four of the last 10 years.. and winning each one? Is that supposed to maximize profit? We can't just focus on select series that "look" suspicious and ignore the bigger picture. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Waiting For That Day 49 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 .... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMP 424 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 Anyway you said it not me. David Stern is a business man. As all business men good or bad look for ways to maximize revenue, right? He may not be the nicest person nor the fairest but he is a damn good business man.... End of the day its about the $ not fairness especially in the Business of entertainment... How does Stern exactly "maximize revenue" by having the Bulls play the Hawks and most likely sweep them, instead of the Rose vs. Howard matchup that would most likely go to 6 or 7 games? If it's so easy to rig games then Stern can *easily* rig the Bulls/Magic series and make sure the Bulls win, since apparently he's rigging the Hawks to beat the Magic, despite the Hawks being far worse than the Bulls. There isn't really any logical reason to rig a Magic/Hawks so that the Hawks can win, unless Stern is the kind of guy that loves to lose money and likes to put out a half-assed product 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Hi-Top 791 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 How does Stern exactly "maximize revenue" by having the Bulls play the Hawks and most likely sweep them, instead of the Rose vs. Howard matchup that would most likely go to 6 or 7 games? If it's so easy to rig games then Stern can *easily* rig the Bulls/Magic series and make sure the Bulls win, since apparently he's rigging the Hawks to beat the Magic, despite the Hawks being far worse than the Bulls. There isn't really any logical reason to rig a Magic/Hawks so that the Hawks can win, unless Stern is the kind of guy that loves to lose money and likes to put out a half-assed product Not that I agree with this but, if you assume that Orlando has a decent chance of winning against Chicago, and that the Heat have a decent shot at besting Boston then it would be a question of Hawks/Chicago + Chicago/Heat generating more revenue than Orlando/Chicago + Orlando/Heat (or substitute Celtics for the Heat). Also, you could argue that yes, they could just fix the second round when Orlando faces Chicago as easily as the first, you could also argue that, as the rounds progress, there is more of a focus on each series, because there are less of them going on, so rigging in the first round would be less risky than the second. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Waiting For That Day 49 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
magicfan83 23 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 Admittedly, I had forgotten about the December 1st game. However, considering that game was BEFORE the trades, its hardly relevant. But go ahead and dismiss my points because I forgot about a game that was played by an entirely different team. And the reason it comes off as a tin hat type thing is because you are doing the classic conspiracy theorist strategy of ignoring the vast amount of logic and reason going against your theory and pointing to one or two instances that are completely unrelated and claiming it as factual proof. Why didn't the refs rig the series against Cleveland? The entire free world outside the city of Orlando had a hard-on for a Kobe vs. Lebron Finals. Are you really suggesting that the Magic going to the finals was best for the NBA? Or that we were that much better than Cleveland that the refs calling 3 or 4 cheap fouls on Dwight fighting for position couldn't have swayed it? Rashard misses those 2 shots and we lose that series. Dwight does get a raw deal, but it has more to do with his size than anything. He also gets away with a LOT of contact, fighting for position and using his elbows and shoulders to create space. Shaq also got similar treatment. Its more the position that he plays, than Stern and the officials getting in a huddle before the game discussing how they can screw Dwight. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Waiting For That Day 49 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
~O~ 565 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 The biggest flaw in the "Refs forcing game 7" in the finals argument is that there actually haven't been that many game 7's in the finals. Also, how do you explain the Spurs being in the finals four of the last 10 years.. and winning each one? Is that supposed to maximize profit? We can't just focus on select series that "look" suspicious and ignore the bigger picture. It was staggering at how much better the Spurs were than the Lakers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Orlando Magic Toaster 26 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 As crazy as it sounds I can't help noticing that in playoff games the officials do help even out playoff series. Take the bulls vs pacers last night for example. I just hope this crazy sounding theory helps Magic tonight! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bravlady 0 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 Whatever happened to the rule they passed a couple of years ago that flopping would get a technical called? I can't recall ever seeing it called in any game. But then again I never knew there was a 10 second rule for shooting free throws until this year. I'm sure if Dwight flops we'll see them pull the flopping rule out of the book and see how many they can call on him. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yoshi_magic 5 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 I agree with bad officiating but please stop the 'HE'S SECRETLY GETTING PROFITS' nonsense already. Just curious then what motive do you believe that Stern, and via him the whole of the NBAs officiating track record under him, has for allowing such bad officiating going on under his watch? I can only imagine that you think it is Hanlon's razor. (Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.) However what many of us are saying is that is a hard, if not imposable, sell after so many years and examples of officiating that when taken in its entirety can be explained by something other than stupidity/incompetence. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostAnime 50 Report post Posted April 24, 2011 Well the "money" motive certainly doesn't make sense in many cases because the bias has been just as easily seen with low market teams than high market ones. Simply because you can't find or prove a motive doesn't mean we should assert one and think everybody rich is just trying to screw you over. That's so cliche and overused. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
