This fucking team has made me a weekday drinker., 🤣
It does seem weird but the flop sold it and the replay confirmed it. It's not scandal. And of course it's easier when it's in your favor.
Like others I'm not enjoying these games until they're over. But I'm digging the makeup of this team and happy to be where we are.
So how's that Tyrese Haliburton over Jalen Brunson for Team USA looking now?
What is going on with the Nuggets? Geesh, 61-35 at the half.
I don’t know why the call is being called controversial, it was 100% the right call, and got confirmed with the replay… that was a bad moving screen by turner, you can’t do that with the game on the line and we capitalized on turners mistake.
This was 1000% a foul.
I hope we’re not on the losing end of any calls like this one.
How do they review and uphold it?
This team is going to fucking kill me.
ToddTT wrote:This was 1000% a foul.I hope we’re not on the losing end of any calls like this one.
How do they review and uphold it?
You can make body contact if you make contact with the ball first, the play was reviewed if Brunson hits his body before his hand touches the ball that play stands and we lose the challenge… a excellent challenge by thibs
We won but we didn’t break them.
fitzfarm wrote:ToddTT wrote:This was 1000% a foul.I hope we’re not on the losing end of any calls like this one.
How do they review and uphold it?
You can make body contact if you make contact with the ball first, the play was reviewed if Brunson hits his body before his hand touches the ball that play stands and we lose the challenge… a excellent challenge by thibs
Philly still bitchin'.
It was a foul but refs should never make those tick tack calls to decide games.
I will happily take it though.
I have friends that haven’t watched the Knicks in close to 30 years that are enamored with this current playoff run. This is beautiful stuff we are witnessing.
fitzfarm wrote:ToddTT wrote:This was 1000% a foul.I hope we’re not on the losing end of any calls like this one.
How do they review and uphold it?
You can make body contact if you make contact with the ball first, the play was reviewed if Brunson hits his body before his hand touches the ball that play stands and we lose the challenge… a excellent challenge by thibs
I clearly see contact with the ball after the body contact.
They got this wrong.
But hey… I forgive them! 
ToddTT wrote:fitzfarm wrote:ToddTT wrote:This was 1000% a foul.I hope we’re not on the losing end of any calls like this one.
How do they review and uphold it?
You can make body contact if you make contact with the ball first, the play was reviewed if Brunson hits his body before his hand touches the ball that play stands and we lose the challenge… a excellent challenge by thibs
I clearly see contact with the ball after the body contact.
They got this wrong.
But hey… I forgive them!
We need to get those optical circuits checked Bot. The refs got it right on this play. See what happens when you lurk those damn Philly forums. Your files get corrupted and you pick up on their degenerate habits.
This group is remarkably quiet, like we got away with something. :) (we did)
It's like the officials got caught in this loop of guilty make up calls.
In Hallburton's poke-away on Brunson, I think the ball then went off Nesmith's foot (kicked ball) before Siakim recovered. So later on the officials imagined a foot deflection.
The offensive foul on Turner was fair - it was the right arm moving toward Ragu.
The out of bounds off the Pacers foot was so clear. Not sure how they got that wrong - it cost us an unnecessary time out (and challenge). It was almost like a make up call for the hand deflection.
On the positive:
* We won.
* Hart was great. Doing a lot of everything.
* Brunson was great, but the ball handling at the end was real loose in the last few mins.
* Big Ragu had a strong scoring game.
* OG made some sick defensive plays...
Negatives:
* A lot of funny turnovers.
* OG in the first half did a lot of creating...
* Isaiah Jackson plays like Knick. Had some sneaky offensive boards and scores.
* McConnell was really impressive.
* So was Nesmith.
You can see a difference in philosophy with the Pacers - they play a big rotation and the guys give full effort every minute they're on the floor. McConnell only played 22 mins, but he was spent. BUT... the Knicks starters have absurd stamina. They're in crazy good shape.
Overall, it's great that we got a win in game 1. Both teams were sort of feeling things out and it could have gone either direction.
On to game 2.
And foul shooting was better. Big plus.
NYStateOfMind wrote:46-3 benches and we still won. Unreal.Panos wrote:We got NOTHING from the bench tonight.
On the flip side, we had 1 starter go for 43 points and two others go for 25 and 24 points. Those 3 players shot 33/56 (59%!) combined. When they're that efficient from the field, why sub them? All 5 Knick starters scored in double figures.
I think the problem with Achiuwa + a center lineup leaves us down a shooter. (Though Hartenstein had some touch with that 3 at the end of the first half)
The pacers bench was unreal and we still won, the chances of there bench scoring 46pts in a game again in this series is slim to none.
Without there bench playing way above there standard, Knicks win in blowout fashion.
Haliburton was really hurting (back spasms). He went 2/6 from the field (2/5 from 3pt range!). He normally takes 15 shots a game.
Plus in the last 5 seconds it looks like he turned his ankle. Something to look out for.
Like I said before this series TJ always turns into a superstar vs us. While this is true why are we making it easy on him? Why would we ever go over the screen on a TJ PNR? That is not knowing your opponent. He does 95% of his damage driving to the hoop. Thibs please fix this.
