Dennis Crocker

@iam_johnw If my dad had tits he’d be my mom

People saying Stephon castle isn’t giving the Knicks credit when he’s not wrong . This series is 3-1 spurs or tied at worst if wemby doesn’t throw the ball of a players back , hits an 8 ft jump shot and or they don’t blow a 30 pt lead

@BrianSuttererMD Yea when you get 3 straight top 3 picks you should be pretty good

Shame how good but young this spurs team is. The Knicks are great, sure - but they are absolutely getting the benefit of a young team making terrible decisions at the end of these games

@NoaDalzell There really aren’t that many incidental flagrants, but when you elbow someone in the head you def put yourself at risk lol

There are too many incidental flagrants and a Finals run can be 28 games! What are we doing

Hot take but there’s no reason why a player should be suspended after 4 flagrant foul points in a playoff run

@DownToBlack Great tip in by unathletic OG!

@DCrocker90 Knicks are a jump shooting team with a bunch of guards/wings who aren't super athletic or great ball handlers. Why would you expect them to get to the line a bunch?

This is great b/c it's actually a perfect example of how Knicks get away with extra physicality all the time. Alvarado stops, loads and shoulder checks Wemby. Wemby doesn't flop & matches the physicality. There are more parallels between NYK & OKC than anyone wants to admit.

@OfficialChipC @mysticjimbo @DJAceNBA But to be clear, all that matters is whether the ball is on a downward trajectory with a chance to score and nothing to do with the intent of the releaser?

Thanks for the question, and the kind words. Intent is hard to judge, so that’s a big reason why it’s not a factor in most decisions refs have to make. That’s also why there aren’t many rules that mention intent. That said, the crew had just seen a lob thrown to Mitch prior to this play, so they are probably anticipating this being another lob play to him, especially since Mitch’s movements could lead us to believe that. I personally felt the ball was going to fall short of the basket on this floater/lob by Alvarado, and did not have an opportunity to score, so when Mitch also reaches in front of the rim, toward the ball, this would create enough doubt for the officials on this play to leave it alone when Kornet deflects it away. It’s very close, but I probably would’ve had a no-call on this as well. If this play had occurred in the last 2 minutes of the game though, they probably would’ve called a goaltending violation, because then they would have the ability to go to the monitor to review it. But on a play this close, outside the last 2 minutes, they left it alone.

The landing zone foul thing is so dumb cause if Hart takes a dive its a flagrant

@OfficialChipC @mysticjimbo @DJAceNBA Since i appreciate how interactive and informative you are on here can you clarify if intent or what’s happening with the ball is all that matters on this goaltend call/no call?

I genuinely have no idea. In a vacuum, this is a fairly easy F1 to identify, IMO. So unfortunately, I don’t have a definitive answer for you. I also don’t want to assume what other factors they considered, which led to their decision not to assess a post-game F1. I’d just be guessing, without any proof. I don’t like doing that.

@stoolpresidente What about the back to back goaltende

Listen the Knicks are fine but that was definitely an offensive foul on Kat. Unbiased opinion

@JustinMacmahan Every single close call goes against the Knicks and for Wemby. Quite unreal

Knicks fans got so mad at me for this, but here we are 1 minute into Game 4 and KAT is on the bench

@aburks41 Yes, castle would never flop

Jay Wright vs Dan Hurley culture. Flopping vs Toughness.

@objkiblast @getnickwright Either trolling or moron, unsure of which one yet.

For the record, had the NBA (correctly) retroactively assessed Wemby a Flagrant 1 for the Brunson play, he wouldn’t have been suspended! There would’ve been no penalty! It simply would mean his margin of error on questionable BS would be gone for Games 4-6. Totally reasonable!

@EricDBolton @TurnAndBurn210 Pleasure actually have a normal convo with someone on this topic, few and far between on here 🤝

@DCrocker90 @TurnAndBurn210 I can live with that framing. F1? Reasonable argument. F2 or suspension? That’s where people started doing theater. My issue is less “stars get protected” and more “San Antonio is suddenly the league’s chosen market” like that sentence makes sense.

Let's just call it what it is: opposing teams/fans know their best chance to beat a Wemby-led Spurs team is to bully Wemby off the floor. By hook or by crook. They cheer on rulebreaking instigation as "physicality," then want to cry and cast Wemby as a taller Draymond Green when they FAFO. These people know they can't beat Wemby at basketball straight up, so they're doing everything they can extracurricularly to get him off the floor.

@EricDBolton @TurnAndBurn210 They’re def protecting a superstar, the league always has, that’s not new. They know if they gave him an F1 (anyone saying F2 is insane) that it handcuffs them going forward because he’s never getting suspended (and shouldn’t unless crazy egregious)

@DCrocker90 @TurnAndBurn210 That’s fair, but I’m not building a Zapruder film thread in the replies. Call it a missed foul. Fine. Where I’m pushing back is turning “missed foul” into “the NBA is protecting San Antonio over New York.” That’s where the train leaves the tracks.

@EricDBolton @TurnAndBurn210 No, everyone is absolutely fouling. There are zero plays of other people retaliating in anything close to how Wemby did to Brunson or Alvarado without a foul being called. If there has been, I’d love for you to show me the clips.

I don’t disagree that retaliation can be called. But sports have always had that social contract: you get physical, sometimes the other guy gets physical back, and then everyone lives with whatever gets called. The issue is acting like only Wemby is doing anything because the algorithm found three screenshots.

@objkiblast @getnickwright He wasn’t guarding wemby you goofy, the Knicks were on offense. Spurs do plenty holding too.

@getnickwright The call was missed, just like the nba missed the call to suspend the Knicks bench. Just play on, it’s going to be a physical series. Also, don’t put the smallest player out there to guard Wemby when there is nothing he can do but grab/hold.

@OfficialChipC @mysticjimbo @DJAceNBA Seems to be only one logical explanation that makes sense and we all know what that is even though those affiliated with the league can’t say it.

@EricDBolton @TurnAndBurn210 Sure, there is physicality and jersey pulling going on all over. They need to call that consistently, whether tight or loose. But you can’t allow retaliation. Wemby has been allowed to retaliate without repercussion. And as you saw from pics, hes not the only one being held.

@DCrocker90 @TurnAndBurn210 So we agree on the principle. Call the fouls on Wemby. Call the fouls on everyone guarding Wemby. Call the holds, grabs, bumps, shoves, and moving screens both ways. I’m all for consistency. I just don’t think people are going to enjoy the audit.

@EricDBolton @TurnAndBurn210 Huh? He’s getting those calls, and shooting an avg of 10 FTs a game. Hes, however, not getting called for the blatant fouls that he is committing. That’s the issue.

@DCrocker90 @TurnAndBurn210 Everyone wants officiating consistency until the consistency is “stop fouling the giant near the rim.” Then suddenly we need a Senate hearing.

@OfficialChipC @mysticjimbo @DJAceNBA More about the NBA not changing it after the fact is my question. What do you think the reason for them not making it a flagrant afterwards?

We can agree to disagree on the Champagnie/Brunson play. While it is true that Champagnie’s right leg has drifted farther forward than his left leg when the initial contact to the back of Brunson’s grounded left leg occurs, it is still only slightly extended outside the frame of his body at that moment. That means it does not meet the NBA’s criteria for an overt, unnatural leg kick-out by an airborne shooter. So Brunson is still the player responsible for this contact, by rule, and since that contact occurs with Brunson’s leg/foot that’s planted in Champagnie’s landing space, it does meet the criteria for a F1 reckless closeout. NBA Refs may occasionally get these wrong in real time, but they are extremely consistent in their ruling on reckless closeouts after going to the monitor to review them. Btw, as a whole, replay decisions made by the crew & replay center officials are RARELY incorrect, because they have 12+ camera angles at their disposal, and nobody knows NBA rules/guidelines better than they do. As for the Wemby/Brunson play, here is my analysis. 👇

@EricDBolton @TurnAndBurn210 Wemby shooting 10 FTs a night. Everyone is having their jersey held. Only one has grabbed a player around their neck and then pushed another in the back of the head and not even have fouls called. We want officiating consistency.

@TurnAndBurn210 This is the whole thing. They don’t want playoff physicality. They want Wemby to receive playoff physicality quietly and politely leave the series. Once he pushes back, suddenly everybody becomes a rules historian.

@MrRickySpanish Na we are saying Mitch got a tech for looking mean at Wemby. Wemby shoots 10 FTs a night, KAT and Brunson in foul trouble, but wemby can do that and not even have a foul called. We want consistency from the refs on the court.

I cannot believe how many tears I'm seeing on the tl over a shove in a NBA Finals game. Who raised yall in this sport?