No Suspensions

[Lascar78]

I know right? I thought this was the right call over all.

As we all know stern is doomed either way. 80 percent of both sides currently think he is impacting the series to screw their team and it happens in most series.

On the marvin/perkins you have to suspend both or neither. That rule enforcement used to be 100 percent automatic and then they relaxed it for the most part.so I am not surprised that they let it slide when neither guy got involved or went very far

On garnett, I think the big shove looks bad at first but if you look he's not really pushing the ref as much as he is yanking his arms back from the ref aggressively to get him to let go. I definitely think it could have been a suspension but I don't think its automatic. By the same token zaza headbutted him and I thought that would be an automatic suspension. Again I think you have to suspend both or neither.

Personally I think the league learned from the amare situation last year. All in all it was a testy situation and that's why we love the playoffs. I'd rather face them full strength and see what we're made of, rather than let them decide it with suspensions. Zaza-KG, Horford-pierce, round 2 coming tommorrow...

[oiatlhawksfan]

Marvin defense in this series has been soooo ignored.

[jhay610]

The problem is though that they made an example out of the Suns Spurs series last year, a great series that the league did not allow to be settled on the floor They set a precedent that no matter how important the game or the player, the rules would be enforced.

Now they are completely going back on that and basically screwing the suns one last time. If I was a suns fan I would be absolutely lived (hell I'm already seeing red as a Hawks fan). All things being equal, I would say this is the correct course of action, but in light of last year's events, you've basically confirmed yourselves as complete and total ass clowns.

I am really stunned by this. I would have thought Stern would want to be consistent after taking the hard line last year. They irreversibly altered the Western Conference finalist and ultimately the champion last year. Now they won't meddle with a first round series. Unbelievable.

[Diesel]

[AHF]

Quote:

---

All things being equal, I would say this is the correct course of action, but in light of last year's events, you've basically confirmed yourselves as complete and total ass clowns.

That pretty much sums it up.

[Lascar78]

That's true but in terms of stepping on the court, last year was more the exception of how they've been going.

You're right that they aren't consistent enough.

The way I'm looking at it is: if they're starting to make the right decision, I'm not gonna [censored] because they made the wrong decision last year. Its a step in the right direction.

Again, it was 100 percent automatic before, then they loosened it. Automatic meant no one could complain but it led to retarded suspensions. It's easier for the league but we lose. I'd prefer a more lenient system even if they're gonna blow it sometimes

[bronnt]

Quote:

---

The problem is though that they made an example out of the Suns Spurs series last year, a great series that the league did not allow to be settled on the floor They set a precedent that no matter how important the game or the player, the rules would be enforced.

Now they are completely going back on that and basically screwing the suns one last time. If I was a suns fan I would be absolutely lived (hell I'm already seeing red as a Hawks fan). All things being equal, I would say this is the correct course of action, but in light of last year's events, you've basically confirmed yourselves as complete and total ass clowns.

I am really stunned by this. I would have thought Stern would want to be consistent after taking the hard line last year. They irreversibly altered the Western Conference finalist and ultimately the champion last year. Now they won't meddle with a first round series. Unbelievable.

I don't really have anything to add-I feel exactly the same way. I just love any and all opportunities to call the league office "ass clowns."

Stern, you're officially a bag of hot air. I appreciate that, in this instance, it was correct not to suspend anyone, but it just makes me angrier about the Suns/Spurs incident a year ago.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

That's true but in terms of stepping on the court, last year was more the exception of how they've been going.

You're right that they aren't consistent enough.

The way I'm looking at it is: if they're starting to make the right decision, I'm not gonna [censored] because they made the wrong decision last year. Its a step in the right direction.

Again, it was 100 percent automatic before, then they loosened it. Automatic meant no one could complain but it led to retarded suspensions. It's easier for the league but we lose. I'd prefer a more lenient system even if they're gonna blow it sometimes

That's BS Lascar.

You don't know if the system is more lenient. The system has just been made lenient for this one time. If something else were to happen and it's not the Hawks Boston, you'd probably see the system go back to it's old ways.

Here's the bottom line.

The Celtics are struggling against the lowest seed in all the playoffs. They could have lost Perkins and KG. Had they lost them for just game 5, it's likely that we would have won the series.

Stern's ruling is simply to snub us. Maybe we don't have the fanbase of a Boston Celtic. Maybe our record is not where people want it. However, what we have been a party to (a victim of) is not the system changing for more leniency... but that of the system changing to benefit the league as a whole. Stern just conveniently changed the rules to give his team an upperhand.

[Lascar78]

I'm saying the system is more lenient based on a couple of instances in the past 3-4 years where guys step on the floor and don't get suspended because it's clear they had no intent of causing trouble. And I think this ruling is consistent with that, and it's a good thing.

I think the one that sticks out is the amare suspension last year. I bet that after all negative feedback, the league really wishes in retrospect that they had just let him play, and they probably should have.

All I'm saying is don't complain about a correct decision just because a bad decision was made last year. And it seems like most here would be fine with the decision if it wasn't for the Amare call last year.

Also to say that we probably would have won the series if you remove KG-Perkins-Marvin-Zaza for one game is silly. That team could still easily crush us. We might squeak out the win with or without those guys, but we would not be favored with or without those guys, and especially in Boston.

[thesheedera]

I wanted to see all 4 suspended for the simple fact that they's lose 2 starters including their best player. But part od me is relieved as we would have been EXTREMELY thin without Marvin and Zaza.

Say what you will about Marvin's lack of offense in this series, the very fact that we have 2 SFs capable of starting is what gives our team some quality depth. At no other position is our backup even close to our starter, and in this series our backup has clearly been more effective.

And Zaza's not hurting us, which is a huge change.

Without them we'd have:

Bibby vs. Rondo

Johnson vs. R. Allen

Childress vs. Pierce

Smith vs. Powe

Horford vs. Davis

(Though Posey may replace Powe at PF with Powe playing C)

Then on the bench we'd have Law, Salim, Mario and Solomon. None have played major minutes, none are very dependable at all.

They'd still have Cassell, House, T. Allen, Posey (or Davis, maybe), and PJ Brown.

They still have frontcourt depth, we have none. They still have more than one option at SF, we don't. The only positions we'd have some depth are in the backcourt, and while I'd take Bibby/Johnson over Rondo/Allen, their bench combo of Cassell/House/T. Allen is much stronger than Law/Salim/Mario.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I wanted to see all 4 suspended for the simple fact that they's lose 2 starters including their best player. But part od me is relieved as we would have been EXTREMELY thin without Marvin and Zaza.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there was never any discussion about suspending Zaza. It was Marvin, KG and Perkins that were at risk.

[AllHeart]

Quote:

---

I can't be the only one who thinks this is a good thing. Seriously, this has been a fantastic series and it would be a shame to see it tainted by suspensions, just like it was a shame last year when Amare and Diaw got suspended. All personal interests aside, as a basketball fan, you have to like the fact that the league is going to let a memorable playoff matchup be settled on the court and not in the league office, no?

AGREED!

[Lascar78]

I never heard any discussion here, but to me if you look at what happened objectively, the most likely to be suspended was KG>Zaza>>>>Perkins>>>>>>>>>>>>>Marvin. I don't think I've ever seen a guy headbutt a guy and get away with it.

Especially when your head weighs 150lbs, that could have been attempted manslaughter.

I just hope the NBA will try to be more consistent in letting guys play as long as they weren't trying to hurt anyone.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

I'm saying the system is more lenient based on a couple of instances in the past 3-4 years where guys step on the floor and don't get suspended because it's clear they had no intent of causing trouble. And I think this ruling is consistent with that, and it's a good thing.

I think the one that sticks out is the amare suspension last year. I bet that after all negative feedback, the league really wishes in retrospect that they had just let him play, and they probably should have.

All I'm saying is don't complain about a correct decision just because a bad decision was made last year.

And it seems like most here would be fine with the decision if it wasn't for the Amare call last year.

Also to say that we probably would have won the series if you remove KG-Perkins-Marvin-Zaza for one game is silly. That team could still easily crush us. We might squeak out the win with or without those guys, but we would not be favored with or without those guys, and especially in Boston.

The ruling last year was in line with the rulings from the start. Since Miami-NY... the rule has been aggressively ruled that anybody that steps on the floor (for any reason) will be suspended. That's weather it's Amare who was going to look at Nash or if it was .. Or how about:

2006. You know Jerome James was suspended for this... He wasn't even part of the fight and when you watch the video, he didn't leave the bench area.