Re: Re: Re: Ah Jim.....
 

I am not looking for your respect. Anyone that has any since is not looking for respect on any internet site. I have enough respect from the officials I work with and the officials I attend meetings with. If I did not have that respect I surely would not have the opportunities that I have or hold the positions I do. Respect from a person like yourself here is very hollow and inconsiquential in my life and the lives of others here. If you do not like what I say or what others say, then maybe you should take your 100 posts and leave. If you can handle the comments, then stay and participate. It really is up to you. You are even setting conditions for how people should respond to a question that has been asked several times on this board. If you cannot take the heat, get the hell out of the kitchen. This board is not about you and it is not about me. It is a place where people all over the world come and share their opinions whether you or I like them.

Peace

I think that the reason you don't see many of the big-name college guys get hired has less to do with their jobs (although that factor should be considered) than with the fact that many of them don't have what the NBA is looking for.

Think about your twenty-five year veterans who have worked multiple Final Fours. These guys are in their fifties, at least. Even if they were courted by the NBA and wanted to go, think about what that would mean. Can you imagine Jim Burr being a rookie on a crew whose chief was somebody in their forties? That's just an impossible situation for everybody concerned, and the NBA is not going to promote conditions that are going to make partnering harder than it has to be.

Implicit in this reasoning is that the NBA picks 'targets' who are pretty young. That way they can send them to their camps and pro leagues, so they can begin to model the type of work that is expected by the referees at that level. The NBA then gets to bring in people who have the habits they want, rather than having to break people of what they consider to be bad habits. It's no coincidence that the conference that is sending the NBA almost all of its new guys is the conference that most closely models what the NBA is doing.

I think your post is above and below their target. I think the days of the 28 year old getting in is over for now. Look at the guys that were hired last year. No really young guys. Until something changes they are looking for older guys that can handle the $$ and responsibility. Jim Burr (or someone with that many games) would have to take a pay cut to go to the NBA so that isn't realistic either.

I will refute this...
First off I hate the jump stop! That being said the NBA rule is different than the NFHS rule. In NFHS you can step and both feet have to land at the same time and ther can be no future pivot. The NBA allows a two count process so when you have a step, the nxt step hits, and the next foot hits. , looks like three steps, and player jumps... This is a perfectly legal play in the NBA.

Now go back and look and see how many times NFHS officals allow the extra "step" after a jump stop or allow the feet to hit the floor a diffrent times and do not call the travel. It happens all the time, and it happens all the time in the NCAA---

Next the best basketball players in the world are in the NBA bar none. The best team during the olympics was someone else. You can never equate the talents of a team to the talents of the individual players. There is the magical world of synergy, team work, playing together, that builds teams. Duke can recruit all the best players they want bu they get beat.. Now they are consistently good because they have a coach who puts them together.. The Lakers had great talent (Shaq, Kobe, etc) last season and could not put a wins together.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ah Jim.....
 

If by respect you mean "not pointing out your misconceptions", I believe you've got a lot of them, even in this forum, from my own observations. BTW, just like you said, I have not been here long at all.


Respect from a person like yourself here is very hollow and inconsiquential in my life and the lives of others here.

I see your thinking now. "who care what those little guys think. the respect from some one bigger guys is much more important." You are not alone in this. but I want to say that, by doing this, you may end up getting none from anybody.

If you do not like what <U>I say </U>or what others say, then maybe you should take your 100 posts and leave.
if you believe I shouldn't be here if I do not like <U>your</U> comments, you may grant yourself too much value than other people give you.



You are even setting conditions for how people should respond to a question that has been asked several times on this board.
My "condition" was "objective opionion". Are you telling me that was wrong?


If you cannot take the heat, get the hell out of the kitchen. This board is not about you and it is not about me. It is a place where people all over the world come and share their opinions whether you or I like them.
You are absolutely correct! I recommend you to read this to yourself a couple times to really know what does it mean.

But you have to do it quick, because the moderater may delete your post again if he does not think your post is "above board".

Ysong,

Your posts have been deleted throughout this thread as well as those by others because they offered no value to the discussion topic. They were simply posted to instigate flames. You have not been the only one addressed regarding these issues. As others have provided email addy's, they have been addressed offline. You have not provided yours therefore, I have addressed you here.

If civil arguments come up through discussion about officiating topics that is fantastic, we all benefit from these discussions because two viewpoints are discussed.

However, when people start to argue, call names and make posts simply to bash each other then those posts get "dumped" for the betterment of the board.

Your comment above as it is written is dripping with sarcasm as it relates to posts getting dumped for not being "above board", and are not appreciated.

If you would like to discuss this further, email off line and I will address.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ah Jim.....
 

Sorry I do not come to the internet trying to gain respect and admiration. Maybe you do. I do not.

The fact that you call yourself a "little guy" tells me everything I need to know about you. I can see your self-esteem is really not that strong.

Wrong again. If you have just started coming to this site, do not tell everyone how someone should behave or comment to your posts. I was here long before you came here and I and anyone else have the right to respond to your post the way we see fit. If you do not like that, either deal with it or find another place to go. I do not care how people respond to me. It is not what someone says, it is how I respond to it. Remember, you came here complaining about a game that you neither have to watch or comment on. If you decide to share with everyone your point of view, accept the fact that others will not accept your point of view and challenge you on that point of view. Every time I make a post I am fully aware of the response that I might get. Either I deal with it or I leave. I just deal with it.

I am not telling you anything. It is obvious that you cannot deal with the fact that people have an opinion outside of your way of thinking. I am not sure what you want by telling someone they have to post an "objective opinion." We are officials, we are not coaches or necessarily fans. We are going to respond based on what we know from an officiating point of view. If that bothers you, go to a fan site and complain with them. I am not going to just accept you point of view when not only is it flawed from in my opinion. You have no facts to back it up.

I am still here. I have been here for along time. So I must be able to take the heat. It sounds like you cannot stand by your opinion and live with it. You want others to go along with you because that is the way you feel. If you do not like what the NBA is all about, watch Major League Soccer. The game is not for you. Maybe the sport of basketball is not for you. When I officiate basketball games, I really do not care what the NBA does or how the officials call the game. If you do care, then that is something you are just going to have to deal with.

Peace

I'm out..
 

Gee, I come back in here and find 7 pages worth of material. Some good and some not so good and that is partly my fault.

This will be my last post, unless someone wants to continue on a more civil note. I'd love to discuss this issue further, but I fear that things have gotten out of hand a little and I am to blame for some of that.

Anyway, with that said, I also should like to modify, retact, some of my statements about the NBA not getting any top college officials. I did not know that that many were now part of the league, although I do feel that the 10 or so is not nearly enough, it is a step in the right direction. I don't know what the percentage is, but anything under 50 percent is far to low for me, especially when the NBA should be the pinnicle of ones officiating career. As kids, we all wanted to end up in the majors etc. so why would it be any different being an official? We all want to work in the best league/level there is and I just don't see the NBA getting that respect.

At this point, there are only really three choices one can make in dealing with this issue. At least, I can only come up with three scenarios regarding the current state of the NBA in regards to the way the game is being officiated, or should I say, the perception of the way the NBA is officiated. This has been an issue since I can remember back in the 60’s, so it is something that has stuck rightly or wrongly over the years.

1.Scenario one states that generally speaking, officiating in the NBA is lacking. The officials let far to much go. As a result of letting them play, this has had the effect of watering down the league and in the eyes of many fans, has devalued the league when compared with officiating in the NFL or MLB. When comparing the officiating with the NFL, MLB and NHL, the NBA is perceived as the worst officiated of the 4 majors.

2.Scenario two states that in general, the league is officiated the way the league wants. In other words, the officials are competent, highly skilled, but are under guidelines dictated by the league office as to what to call and what to possibly pass on. The league wants a certain type of game and the officials are marching to that drumbeat.

3.Scenario three states that there is nothing wrong with the NBA. Bad officiating is only a perception which really has no merit once one understands the ins and outs of the game, specifically rule knowledge. Furthermore, what is perceived as bad officiating is due in part to the skill of the players. They are bigger, faster, etc. than they were 30 years ago and therefore, cannot be officiated in the same manner as say, D-1 college programs or the same way they did 30 years ago.

So, take you pick. My vote, not that anyone cares or that it matters in the least is no. 2. I think the ref's are doing what they are told, under the guidelines of the league office. The league wants a certain type of game and the officials work to that end. FWIW, I think that all the NBA officials are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I believe they are all skill and competent, but are at odds with what the league wants.

goose

I'll go with door #2 and your rationale also, Goose. The NBA is getting the game called the way that it wants it called. Unfortunately, that makes their current game unwatchable imo. Iow, basically anymore the NBA is AND1 with a better tv contract.The NHL made exactly the same mistake by allowing clutching, grabbing, interference disguised as "left wing locks", etc. Note that I said the NHL and not the NHL officials.

Call me when the NBA is good enough to beat Argentina. Until then......

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ah Jim.....
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JRutledge

Quote:

Originally posted by ysong If by respect you mean "not pointing out your misconceptions", I believe you've got a lot of them, even in this forum, from my own observations. BTW, just like you said, I have not been here long at all.

I've never stated or even implied that you are here for repect. On the contrary, I am telling my fellow posters do not give you any unfounded respect just because of those heavy tittles you care to carry arround.



So, does that mean you will care even less what posters like me think?


If I understand you correctly, you are misleading other posters by saying I am here to complain a game. But for your info, I have NEVER complained about any games. All my previous posts were about the rule interpretations of certain scenarios, some of them are pure theriotical, to which you bashed them as preposterous after you realized you were wrong on a couple of basic principles of basketball rules. (I was surprised to find that out too.)

If you claim I have ever complained about a game, show me the proof. one post of mine which was complaining about a game is enough.


Originally posted by JRutledge
<U>If you do not like what the NBA is all about, watch Major League Soccer. The game is not for you. Maybe the sport of basketball is not for you.</U>

Just a counterproof for your another misleading statement: in one of my post about the end of "team control", I said NBA rules, when applied to "backcourt", encouraged more competation in comparison with NCAA rules or HS rules. That indicates I like NBA in this regard.

Originally posted by JRutledge
</U> When I officiate basketball games, I really do not care what the NBA does or how the officials call the game. If you do care, then that is something you are just going to have to deal with. </U>

you said you watched M. Jordan's last winning shot in a super-slow motion repeatly and came to the same ruling as the game officials. Is this another contradiction to your own claims? It seems to me you care a lot about what NBA does and what their officials do.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ah Jim.....
 

Ysong,

It is obvious to me that you keep belittling your own opinion for the impression of others. If you do not like the NBA, turn off the TV and do not go to games. I have lived in a city that has an NBA team for over 6 years now. I do not turn on the TV or attend games especially when tickets were not hard to get. I have attended one NBA game since I moved here and it was an officiating event with a discounted rate. I spent most of the time talking with my friend and could hardly tell you anything that happened in the game. I personally do not like the NBA like I used to. I do not watch the NBA like I used to. When I do watch the NBA, I see the officials calling the game as the way they are instructed by the league. I belong to two associations that that have current NBA officials as former members. I have heard two of the 3 current NBA officials from my area talk about officiating and some philosophies of the league. I have said many times that I do not watch a lot or like NCAA Women's basketball, but when I do I watch the officials and their procedures in action. I do monitor the trends, mechanics and philosophies of all levels of basketball because some of those things filter down to the college and HS levels. And looking at the last few years of mechanics and rules, it is obvious that what the NBA does change what we do at the lowest of levels. I surely do not come here and complain that what is not fair in the NBA when I do not call the game and I probably never will. What was called against MJ or not called against Shaq is not something I worry about.

Peace

JR, You made my point...
 

JR...

You do realize that you made my initial point. I said the NBA was the weaker sister, not necessarily becasue of bad referees, but because the league views "entertainment" over basketball. It does not "pay" to have the stars sit.

Point two clearly would indicate that this is the real reason why more good, great officials don't jump.

Ask any great college football official if they had the chance would they move to the NFL? Case closed! Ask any great college umpire if they got a call from MLB, would they go? Case closed. Now ask the great college referees if they got a call from the NBA if they would go?

Money? Prestige? Placement at the bottom? What gives? Many good officials will say they are content doing a good D1 schedule, but I can't imagine them not wanting to work the best basketball league in the world. That is, if it is indeed perceived as the best, and clearly it is not.

Maybe I'm over simplifiying it, but the NBA is reaping what it is sowing, and then crying about the lack of viewership while the NCAA eats the NBA for lunch.

Then Stern gets all in a tizzy becasue someone treads on the "integrity" of the NBA game....give me a break! Integrity left the game a long time ago.

goose

Well, I don't know whether I "made" your point. :)

I do, however, agree with your point, Goose. I personally don't like the direction the NBA has taken, and I don't think that you can blame the officials for that direction. Style seems to have prevailed over substance imo.

It's gonna be interesting though to see how far Stern does take this Van Gundy thing in the latest "Cuban whistle crisis".

Re: JR, You made my point...
 

Your theory that the NBA refs do not come from the college ranks does not hold water. Currently 65% of the NBA staff has come from the college ranks and many of their resumes read final fours, conference championships, NIT/NCAA tournament games. Pretty good pettidgree and flys in the face that some of the best college refs don't go pro. The staff can only be so big and some of the good NCAA refs don't fit the NBA "image" that they desire others have been college officials for so long that that is what they are comfortable with etc. The NBA is looking for good, fit (by their definition) etc.

For the record those referees with NCAA exp now working the NBA are as follows:
Bennie Adams, Gary Benson, Matthew Boland, Tony Brothers, James Capers, Jim Clark, Derrick Collins, Sean Corbin, Dan Crawford, Mark Davis, Joe Derosa, Kevin Fehr, Nolan Fine, Joe Forte, Sott Foster, Luis Grillo, David Jones, Anthony Jordan, Jess Kersey, Courtney Kirkland, Eric Lewis, Ed Malloy, Ken Mauer, Rodney Mott, Tommy Nunez, Ron Olesiak, Violet Palmer, Olandis Poole, Blane Reichelt, LeRoy Richardson, Phil Robinson, Eddie F. Rush, Michael Smith, Bill Spooner, Derrick Stafford, Scott Wall, Tom Washington, Greg Willard, Leon Wood and Zach Zarba.

Others come from fathers and brothers in the pro officiating business, Ron Garretson (His dad was a long time NBA official) Steve Javie (His dad worked 4 NFL Super Bowls), Joe Crawford (2 Brothers working MLB). These guys probably know something about officiating based on their pedigree.

The balance just did not list it on their resume because it was so long ago (i.e. Dick Bavetta, Bennett Salvatore) This is speculation on my part but you get the drift.

I was at a college camp last year and Joe Borja (sp?) was in attendance. Who do you think he was there to look at... the 16 year old players... no. He was there to scout the college officials and the up and coming talent.

I think you are grasping at straws with this argument. Just because Burr is an outstanding college official doesn't mean he fits the NBA mold while others do...

Fouls Per Game
 

Since we had this discussion before, I wanted to show more statistics.

2004-2005 NBA Fouls Per Game

Jermane O'Neal is #4.

Shaq is #10 and Yao Ming is #9

All the players in the top #10 with the highest foul totals per game were either forwards or centers.

The highest ranked guard was Steve Francis at #12. You look down to the top 50 and you see more and more centers and forwards with the highest total.

I am sure if someone did a study they would find similar totals over the years. You really do not see many fouls are called by the officials on the perimeter, but near the basket. Who is most likely to be near the basket and attempt to block shots? You got it, centers and forwards. Not 6'2" guards who are defending other guards.

Peace