2024 NBA Playoffs: East Semifinals: #2 New York Knicks vs #6 Indiana Pacers (IND WINS 4-3)

[___Rand___]

Fellow Knick fans, that last Brunson 3 was looking for a foul, not a made shot. He knows it, he might as well have just said it in the post game. He was getting murdered in the last couple mins there, but that shot was an awful decision

He owned up to it post game. That it was a foul-bait, and a bad decision. Now will the Knicks fans outside of you own up to it?

So were any knicks fans actually denying that?

Why don't you read your own guys posts? There's a ton of them! my gosh you're blind as a bat.

[Im Coming Home]

He owned up to it post game. That it was a foul-bait, and a bad decision. Now will the Knicks fans outside of you own up to it?

So were any knicks fans actually denying that?

Why don't you read your own guys posts? There's a ton of them! my gosh you're blind as a bat.

I don't see any Knicks fans denying he was selling the contact and trying to get a foul call there at all.

Just Knicks fans pointing out that there was a foul on the floor before the shot and that there was some contact in the back from Turner on that shot that Brunson decided to oversell it to hope for a call. That isn't the same thing as denying he was trying to sell a foul there.

[gumbercules]

WILD they now play 3:30 Sunday after this ... favors the Pacers. Hobbled Haliburton & Brunson cancel each other out, but Indy's bench should thrive on Sunday

Hobbled Hali? Half the Knicks team are injured lmaoo

He simply said that Hali and Brunson, being hobbled, cancel each other out. What do the other injuries have to do with that? How does that disprove what he is saying.

This is simple reading comprehension.

[cgf]

He owned up to it post game. That it was a foul-bait, and a bad decision. Now will the Knicks fans outside of you own up to it?

So were any knicks fans actually denying that?

Why don't you read your own guys posts? There's a ton of them! my gosh you're blind as a bat.

So you've got no receipts. I had a feeling that was the case.

[Tron Carter]

Read on Twitter

[Im Coming Home]

Read on Twitter

And they got a free layup 2 points out of it..

[VicG]

Read on Twitter

This was egregious in real time. Wild it wasn’t called.

[cgf]

Read on Twitter

And they got a free layup 2 points out of it..

The league is so rigged. They'll do anything to help small market teams compete for the sake of "parity"

[Bob Ross]

One missed/incorrect call? One?

[Nuntius]

You weren’t winning game. You can believe that as much as you want but Brunson was reasonably healthy that game. You guys weren’t winning a close game in the 4th.

You guys pulled a miracle out of a hat plus ref home cooking just to win this close game in the 4th where we were missing even more players than game 1 and Brunson is playing hobbled.

What are you even talking about? The game was tied with 42 seconds left. Nembhard made a desperation 3 and that gave you the game. A game the refs had given you the advantage in all quarter.

I guess, you could argue, with the refs in your corner, that the game was yours, but tied with 40 seconds left is still anyone's game.

Are you sure you're replying to the poster you wanted to reply to? Because NiceLikeChrist is a Knicks fan and his "you weren't winning game" comment was directed at a Pacers fan.

[djsunyc]

brunson is the knicks best player but their most important player is OG.

pacers have to win game 4 and if og's not ready for game 5, going back up 3-2 to indy would be in their best interest lol.

[Nuntius]

This is a very fun and close series, but let's be real, if the Knicks had their healthy forwards available, it would be over in 5, but I picked Knicks in 6.

The Knicks would definitely be the overwhelming favorites to win this series if they were fully healthy, just like they are the favorites right now. Knicks in 6 is indeed the most likely outcome.

That said, do not underestimate the ability of this Pacers team to play up to their competition. There is a reason why we had the 4th best winning percentage against teams above .500 in the whole league this season. Only Boston, OKC and Minny were better at beating teams above .500 than us this year. That says something.

Yes, we are still an inexpierenced team and, yes, we aren't good defensively and, yes, we probably wouldn't be here if the Bucks didn't have injuries but that doesn't mean that we'd roll over and get swept. This team fights.

[Nuntius]

For me the biggest questionable calls were the blocking fouls and/or charging fouls and the 2 times Knicks were held from contesting a layup.

3 went the Pacers way(one that the Knicks had to challenge, Divo And1). The And1 Haliburton got in the 4th where Deuce McBride was clearly set and outside the restricted area, and then the Brunson one where it was closer but I still think he was set and outside the restricted area all went the Pacers way, and 2 of those were late in the 4th and lead to big buckets and FTs/Points for the Pacers.

I remember those plays.

The DiVincenzo play was indeed correctly overturned. They got it wrong initially which is why you had to use the challenge to correct it. Here's the replay -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=323&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=DiVincenzo%201%27%20Driving%20Layup%20(17%20PTS)%20(Brunson%203%20AST)

It looks like the ref that called it a charge was the one underneath by the basket and when the two bodies collided, this ref's view of the play was obstructed by Achiuwa and Siakam jostling for rebounding position. My guess is that he assumed that Nesmith got out of the restricted area and therefore called it a charge. He was clearly mistaken, though, and the call was rightfully overturned.

As for the other two plays, both McBride and Brunson were clearly outside the restricted area. That's a given. What probably caused the call to go against them was whether they were in set in time or not.

Here's what the rulebook has to say on this:

https://official.nba.com/the-nba-rule-authority/

To get into a legal position, the defender needs to establish himself in the path of the offensive player before contact is made, thus “beating him to the spot,” and before he starts his upward shooting motion.

I put the "and" in bold because that's the crux of the question here. McBride and Brunson were indeed set the moment the contact was made. But that's not enough. They also had to be set when Hali and Siakam started their upward shooting motion.

So, what marks the start of a player's upward shooting motion during a drive? It's the gather. Here's the NBA's Video Rulebook on the matter:

https://videorulebook.nba.com/archive/foul-in-the-act-of-shooting-foul-occurs-after-the-gather-on-drive/

And here's the explanation provided along with the video in the URL above:

“This is an example of a defensive foul that occurs with the offensive player in the act of shooting. The defensive player, Kelly Oubre Jr., reaches in and hits the arm of the offensive player, Kyle Kuzma, after the offensive player had gathered the ball. Because the gather marks the beginning of the continuous shooting motion on drives to the basket, this is a foul in the act of shooting.”

Now, let's watch the plays in question.

Here's the play involving Haliburton and McBride -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=495&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=McBride%20S.FOUL%20(P2.T3)%20(K.Scott)

When Haliburton gathers the ball, McBride was not set yet.

And here's the play involving Siakam and Brunson -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=572&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=Brunson%20S.FOUL%20(P2.PN)%20(K.Scott)

Once again, when Siakam gathers the ball, Brunson isn't set yet.

In my opinion, both calls were correct but they are indeed close enough that I can understand why someone who supports the Knicks would disagree with them.

That and twice a Knicks player was held(the obvious Siakam one on Hartenstein, and another where I believe Divo was knocked over by an elbow/arm of Turner when he was in position to contest a layup) while trying to contest a layup where if they weren't, they could've contested it and caused a miss. All of these were in the 4th quarter and lead to points for Pacers..

I do not remember that DiVincenzo/Turner play. If you can find tell me a time-stamp, I can try and find it.

As for the Siakam play, I fully agree. I actually missed it during live play (because I was watching the ball) but, yes, it clearly was a foul.

[cgf]

This is a very fun and close series, but let's be real, if the Knicks had their healthy forwards available, it would be over in 5, but I picked Knicks in 6.

The Knicks would definitely be the overwhelming favorites to win this series if they were fully healthy, just like they are the favorites right now. Knicks in 6 is indeed the most likely outcome.

That said, do not underestimate the ability of this Pacers team to play up to their competition. There is a reason why we had the 4th best winning percentage against teams above .500 in the whole league this season. Only Boston, OKC and Minny were better at beating teams above .500 than us this year. That says something.

Yes, we are still an inexpierenced team and, yes, we aren't good defensively and, yes, we probably wouldn't be here if the Bucks didn't have injuries but that doesn't mean that we'd roll over and get swept. This team fights.

You get good teams to play your game surprisingly well for a young team.

[Nuntius]

One missed/incorrect call? One?

In the last two minutes? Yeah, that seems accurate. Do you have any other candidates?

[Im Coming Home]

Spoiler:

For me the biggest questionable calls were the blocking fouls and/or charging fouls and the 2 times Knicks were held from contesting a layup.

3 went the Pacers way(one that the Knicks had to challenge, Divo And1). The And1 Haliburton got in the 4th where Deuce McBride was clearly set and outside the restricted area, and then the Brunson one where it was closer but I still think he was set and outside the restricted area all went the Pacers way, and 2 of those were late in the 4th and lead to big buckets and FTs/Points for the Pacers.

I remember those plays.

The DiVincenzo play was indeed correctly overturned. They got it wrong initially which is why you had to use the challenge to correct it. Here's the replay -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=323&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=DiVincenzo%201%27%20Driving%20Layup%20(17%20PTS)%20(Brunson%203%20AST)

It looks like the ref that called it a charge was the one underneath by the basket and when the two bodies collided, this ref's view of the play was obstructed by Achiuwa and Siakam jostling for rebounding position. My guess is that he assumed that Nesmith got out of the restricted area and therefore called it a charge. He was clearly mistaken, though, and the call was rightfully overturned.

As for the other two plays, both McBride and Brunson were clearly outside the restricted area. That's a given. What probably caused the call to go against them was whether they were in set in time or not.

Here's what the rulebook has to say on this:

https://official.nba.com/the-nba-rule-authority/

To get into a legal position, the defender needs to establish himself in the path of the offensive player before contact is made, thus “beating him to the spot,” and before he starts his upward shooting motion.

I put the "and" in bold because that's the crux of the question here. McBride and Brunson were indeed set the moment the contact was made. But that's not enough. They also had to be set when Hali and Siakam started their upward shooting motion.

So, what marks the start of a player's upward shooting motion during a drive? It's the gather. Here's the NBA's Video Rulebook on the matter:

https://videorulebook.nba.com/archive/foul-in-the-act-of-shooting-foul-occurs-after-the-gather-on-drive/

And here's the explanation provided along with the video in the URL above:

“This is an example of a defensive foul that occurs with the offensive player in the act of shooting. The defensive player, Kelly Oubre Jr., reaches in and hits the arm of the offensive player, Kyle Kuzma, after the offensive player had gathered the ball. Because the gather marks the beginning of the continuous shooting motion on drives to the basket, this is a foul in the act of shooting.”

Now, let's watch the plays in question.

Here's the play involving Haliburton and McBride -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=495&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=McBride%20S.FOUL%20(P2.T3)%20(K.Scott)

When Haliburton gathers the ball, McBride was not set yet.

And here's the play involving Siakam and Brunson -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=572&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=Brunson%20S.FOUL%20(P2.PN)%20(K.Scott)

Once again, when Siakam gathers the ball, Brunson isn't set yet.

In my opinion, both calls were correct but they are indeed close enough that I can understand why someone who supports the Knicks would disagree with them.

That and twice a Knicks player was held(the obvious Siakam one on Hartenstein, and another where I believe Divo was knocked over by an elbow/arm of Turner when he was in position to contest a layup) while trying to contest a layup where if they weren't, they could've contested it and caused a miss. All of these were in the 4th quarter and lead to points for Pacers..

I do not remember that DiVincenzo/Turner play. If you can find tell me a time-stamp, I can try and find it.

As for the Siakam play, I fully agree. I actually missed it during live play (because I was watching the ball) but, yes, it clearly was a foul.

Interesting about the gather on the charges, I feel like thats not really taken into consideration normally, although i obviously can't disagree with the rule book itself, I feel like they call it differently in games, usually as long as the defender was set and didn't 'slide under' the player(which the Brunson one was def close to sliding under) I feel like they call it a charge. But based off the rulebook you're correct. To me, prior to learning the letter of the law with the rule, I thought Deuce's was very obvious as a charge as I feel like I've seen a player set like that hundreds of times and it be a charging call. Brunsons was def the more questionable of the two.

With the Divo/Turner one I really don't remember exactly unfortunately, it was either in 3rd or 4th quarter, but I feel like it was end of 3rd or beginning of 4th.. I *think* it was Siakam who may have scored on it or Haliburton.. Idk if that makes it easier to find.

Thank you for the insight it was interesting to learn.

[Bob Ross]

One missed/incorrect call? One?

In the last two minutes? Yeah, that seems accurate. Do you have any other candidates?

Brunson got smacked in the fave on a drive - Breen even called it out on the air. Brunson getting fouled before that awful 3 point attempt

[Nuntius]

One missed/incorrect call? One?

In the last two minutes? Yeah, that seems accurate. Do you have any other candidates?

Brunson got smacked in the fave on a drive - Breen even called it out on the air. Brunson getting fouled before that awful 3 point attempt

The only shot inside the paint that Brunson attempted in the final 2 minutes was this one -> https://www.nba.com/stats/events?CFID=&CFPARAMS=&GameEventID=610&GameID=0042300213&Season=2023-24&flag=1&title=MISS%20Brunson%202%27%20Driving%20Finger%20Roll%20Layup

There is absolutely zero contact to Brunson's face here and Breen doesn't say anything about it either. Are you sure that the play you're talking about happened within the last two minutes?

As for the one before the Brunson 3, it looked like a 50/50 call to me. They could have called it and we'd be fine with it as we'd still be ahead and have the ball even if Brunson made both FTs. But the L2M report says that this was a correct no call as they deemed the contact marginal.

[doogie_hauser]

No OG for Game 4 is a massive blow for The Knicks.

Maybe if he had another day's rest he could have been okay for this game.

[Kurtz]

OG is a guy who always takes longer to come back from injury than you'd expect/hope for.