RaceToTheTop

Decent late portal pick up for North Carolina: Vanderilt PF/C Ven-Allen Lubin. Two years of eligibilty left; 6'8", averaged 12.3 pts and 6.3 reb. Started in all 26 games he played in, shot 50/33 (on 13 of 39)/73. Freshman year played at Notre Dame, averaged 6.2 points in 17 mpg. 109th ranked recruit in class of 2022.

The better question is why even watch? Last night was a perfect example of why I don't typically tune into the NBA and probably won't bother for the rest of the year. If one-sided reffing is a given and to be expected, then I'm fine with letting others watching.

Every team is going to make unforced errors. No team is going to play a perfect game. No ref is going to ref a perfect game, either. But I do think think that the errors made by refs are going beyond simple judgement errors and into producing a product that the NBA wants. I do have a problem with that and I'm not sure why anybody else wouldn't. The reason that you are saying their own mistakes mattered the most IMO was because of a contrived scenario created by the officiating. More than any other league, professional or otherwise, in the NBA teams and individuals are rewarded or punished by their team and last names on their uniforms. I read a biography from an NBA ref (can't remember who it was, may have been Nick Baveti) who talked about having an on court conversation with a player who accused him of protecting superstar players and his response to him was 'of course I do, they pay all of our salaries'. Bottom line, if it's a sport, call it even. If it's entertainment, count me out because I don't particularly find their product entertaining. I mainly stay away from NBA games for that reason. And I would say to people that like the product, more power to you but at least acknowledge what it is.

Tim Donaghy bet on games he reffed for four years and was not once investigated by the NBA nor dismissed or punished for incorrect calls. It was the FBI that nailed him, not the league that should. The fact is that the league should have noticed.

The scenario of making the mistake that lead to that doesn't exist in a fairly called game. You seem to want to ignore everything that happened except that. Domino #100 doesn't fall unless the first 99 do. Saying things like "the Pacers overcome the officiating for 47:30" but the Pacers are wholly responsible for the loss is contradictory. The outcome most certainly was effected by the officiating. Should the Pacers have won given they had a 3 point lead and the ball with 10 seconds left? Certainly. But the last 10 seconds are irrelevant if the game is called on the square.

Sorry, but that is complete BS. How the game is officiated the first 47:30 is completely relevant. Throw that ball away when you are up 10 points and it's meaningless. The outcome isn't just decided in the last 30 seconds.

Oh, it's been obvious for years that the NBA generally gets what it wants. If you aren't one of the league darlings or have a player the league wants on the big stage, more calls than not are going to go against you. It's why I'm not a big fan of the game. Truth is the Pacers were soooo much better than the Knicks in the series yet 'somehow' it came down to a game seven.

So basically you are saying the first 47:30 is irrelevant so long as the officials keep a team within range. ****, let's just start the game with 30 seconds left since the rest doesn't matter.

Sorry, but BS. Celtics shot 45 threes today and had 30 free throws. Pacers shot 35 threes and had 10 free throws.....four in the last minute of overtime when it was irrelevant. The player you said on the Pacers that seeks contact -- Siakam -- took 23 shots from the field and had.......0 free throws. Go back to the Knicks game where they called Turner for a 'moving screen'......there was a pick way worse tonight for the Celtics with about a minute to go and no call made. They reviewed a call where Siakam's jersey was pulled and turned a blind eye.

Yep, bad inbound plays. But saying it was the Pacers blowing the game is what the NBA thrives on -- escaping blame for playing favorites to teams they want to win.

Pacers have shot 76 fewer free throws than their opponents in the last eight games. Sorry if I don't get the rationalization that it was the Pacers 'pissing down their leg'. The first 46 minutes of a game matter and set up the last 2. There is no close game to blow if the game wasn't close. Consider the fact that the Pacers had the ball with 10 seconds left and a three point lead and got fouled and STILL weren't shooting free throws yet. Come on.

The fact that you have to play refball says everything you need to know about the NBA. Pacers outshot and outrebounded the Celtics. Teams aren't going to play perfect games but when you clearly outplay the other team sans refs, you SHOULD win.

The last two minutes are completely irrelevant with honest officiating.

Reviewing a play where Tatum two arm grabs Toppin. In college, that's a ******* hook and hold on Tatum

Well, guess the NBA got what it wanted.

BS explanation by the announcers. Foul was clearly on the ground.

Phantom and one. My ******* God.

Haliburton getting three free throws....matching the Pacer total for the first 51 minutes

LOL. No whistle until five seconds after the miss. Free throws 25-3

23-3 from the line. No need to watch OT.

Refs will eat their whistles on this possession and will give them the game in OT>

GOD DAMN IT, FOUL

Pacers should foul here.

Pull on the jersey....no ******* call. Again.

**** you, Boston.