Brad Miller's Shot

vhans5219

New member
Joined:
Mar 28, 2009
Posts:
250
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Chicago IL
That should've counted right ?
What do you guys think ?
 

clonetrooper264

Retired Bandwagon Mod
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 11, 2009
Posts:
23,369
Liked Posts:
7,407
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  2. Golden State Warriors
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
They ruled it good on the floor, every single replay that they showed was hard to tell, should've counted. Atrocity of epic proportions...well maybe not epic but it was pretty darn bad.
 

TheStig

New member
Joined:
Apr 5, 2009
Posts:
3,636
Liked Posts:
38
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.
 

engies

New member
Joined:
Mar 29, 2009
Posts:
355
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Oakleigh South, Melbourne, Australia
of course from the top it would look like his hands still on it, from below it looks like it got off in time. Bottom line it was hard to tell and they should've left the call as is

Then again if the situation was reversed and nuggets had hit the same shot miller did, would we be feeling the same way?

I think in the end either way one team wouldve felt they got screwed

Bottom line is we wouldnt have been in that position if everyone other than rose deng taj and noah had hit there shots. We got plenty of good looks, but again Kirk Trainwreck and Salmons are just not bringing it this season
 

mlewinth

New member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2009
Posts:
680
Liked Posts:
6
TheStig wrote:
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.

Thats what I thought too....
 

TheStig

New member
Joined:
Apr 5, 2009
Posts:
3,636
Liked Posts:
38
mlewinth wrote:
TheStig wrote:
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.

Thats what I thought too....

As soon as I saw it going away from the basket, I knew we lost. There just isn't the time to shoot it unless its thrown perfectly. It was a bad play, you really had to have had a second cut going to the basket with Noah after Rose's cut. Or cleared out everyone from the basket and just lobed it to rose.
 

Shakes

Iconoclast
Joined:
Apr 22, 2009
Posts:
3,857
Liked Posts:
142
It's impossible to tell so they should have let it stand. With the naked eye it looked good, with normal speed replays it looked good, with slow-mo replays it looked good, with freeze frames from 50 different angles there was some doubt. To me I let that stand, and if the Nuggets had made the shot I'd say the same thing (and be really pissed we left someone that wide open).

Ultimately though we should have won the game before then. Salmons is starting to look like the second coming of Larry Hughes, and Kirk is living up to the Hinbrick nickname right now.
 

clonetrooper264

Retired Bandwagon Mod
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 11, 2009
Posts:
23,369
Liked Posts:
7,407
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  2. Golden State Warriors
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
TheStig wrote:
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.
I thought if it was less that .3 than it needed to be a tip. I could be wrong though.
 

Diddy1122

I ain't your pal dickface
Joined:
Mar 30, 2009
Posts:
4,459
Liked Posts:
1,155
Location:
Chicago
TheStig wrote:
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.

.4. The Fisher Rule.

I still say it was good. It was really too close to tell either way but if you cant conclusively say one way or the other, the call should have stood. So the call should've stood & we should be 5-2 right now.
 

TheStig

New member
Joined:
Apr 5, 2009
Posts:
3,636
Liked Posts:
38
clonetrooper264 wrote:
TheStig wrote:
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.
I thought if it was less that .3 than it needed to be a tip. I could be wrong though.

Yeah, your right its .3. Which is weird because miller didn't even have a full catch and shoot and it was so close.

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html

90-91
 

engies

New member
Joined:
Mar 29, 2009
Posts:
355
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Oakleigh South, Melbourne, Australia
Diddy1122 wrote:
TheStig wrote:
No, he moved the ball too much, if he would have cought it in shooting postion it would have been good. I thought the nba established anyway that you couldn't do a catch and shoot with less than .6.

.4. The Fisher Rule.

I still say it was good. It was really too close to tell either way but if you cant conclusively say one way or the other, the call should have stood. So the call should've stood & we should be 5-2 right now.

Not sure if this has been asked but is there any chance the bulls can send in a tape to NBA to review the decision
 

houheffna

Ignoring Idiots
Joined:
May 6, 2009
Posts:
8,673
Liked Posts:
2,711
Not worth the time...It won't change the results regardless...
 

Bullsman24

Mr Metta World Peace
Joined:
May 10, 2010
Posts:
1,403
Liked Posts:
51
i'll say it once, there was no CONCLUSIVE evidence that it was no good. it was way too close to tell. if that's not the refs loving melo and billups, idk what is...
 

Top