Friday November 20 2009 – 10:53pm Eastern - Toronto, ON 

Heat @ Raptors

Final Score:
120 -113, Raptors (Toronto now 6-7)

“Smith and Jones” Player of the Game:
- CHRIS BOSH
29 points
12 rebounds
4 blocks
10/14 FG
9/13 FT

“Alice Fazoolis” Player of the Game:
- ANDREA BARGNANI
24 points
10 rebounds
2 blocks
9/14 FG

Shout-out to the Heat:
- DWYANE WADE
30 points
8 assists 
5 rebounds
2 steals

Stats that stood out:
- Toronto scores 43 points in the 2nd QRT alone
- Heat outscore the Raps 34-20 in the 3rd
- Toronto was up by 23 (their biggest lead) in the 3rd QRT
- Raps come into the game leading the league in turnovers per game (only 12.2) but had 20 vs the Heat
- Jarrett Jack off the bench for arguably his best game … 17 points (including 2 HUGE 3-balls in the 4th QRT)

Thumbs Up:
- In spite of the fact that D-Wade went off for 30 points, Toronto held him to only 4 points in the 4TH quarter … thanks to some solid play / D off the bench from J. Jack

Thumbs Down:
- Coughing up the 23-point lead … seeing it trimmed to only 1 in the 4th QRT

Smith says:
- “Coming off a 4-game road swing … dealing with 3 losses in a row … Toronto was lined up for a letdown.  6-15 all-time when coming home off a 4-game west coast trip … they got a HUGE win.  This team is taking care of home court (4-1) and that’s a big plus for the season ahead.”

Jones Says:
- n/a

Keep the 3-ball Steak Alive (873 games and counting):
- The Raptors were 9 of 15 from 3PT range

Next game:
- Magic @ Raptors – Friday November 20 2009 – 12:30pm Eastern
- Tune in at 12:00pm for the “Pizza Pizza” starting line ups

Missed The Rap?  Listen to it here:

[audio:http://qml.quiettouch.com/files/radio/fan590/hotaudio/rap-fan-20091120.mp3]

10 Responses to “Raps Torch Heat”
  1. 1.

    Eric, you forgot the turnovers! for thumbs down! 23 TO?

    BUT,

    Great Game!
    And
    They Won!!!

    - Raps Fan
  2. 2.

    Hi, Eric.

    Early in the broadcast of last night’s game, heard you and Paul question how come an official on the baseline did not call a foul on a play which occurred directly in front of him while another official who was much further away and opposite side of the floor [looking through a maze of bodies] made the call.

    In my experience, when situations like that occur, it is almost always a case of the different officials involved having very specific responsibilities for the action that takes place on the court, according to the “Game Mechanics” of working with a 3-man crew [as opposed to the traditional 2-man variety seen at some lower levels of the game.

    i.e. 2-man Crew Mechanics dictate that one official has the action which takes place on the ball while the other has the action that takes place off the ball, with one official in the "lead" [i.e. on the offensive baseline, in half-court situations] position and the other in the “trail” [i.e. toward the center-line of the floor] spot.

    3-man Crew Mechanics are different, however, because of the 3rd official [i.e. the "center" official], who is assigned a specific area on the court to watch for fouls and violations that occur away from the ball.

    In most situations, it’s either the lead or the trail official that has the responsibility of looking for rules infractions that might occur involving the ball-handler; while, the center official is tasked with looking for infractions that occur off the ball.

    Thus, even if a play happens directly in front of a specific official, if it doesn’t fall within his jurisdiction on the play, he MAY not make the call you think SHOULD obviously be his.

    Understanding the mechanics of how the 3-man crew actually works makes a big difference in one’s understanding of what calls are made by whom and which ones are in fact someone else’s to make [or not], altogether.

    Cheers :-)

    - khandor
  3. 3.

    Now let’s see if the Raps can learn the very obvious lesson from the last week:

    You get down by 20, storm back but you don’t have enough left in the tank to close out the game.

    You get up by 20, the opposition sotrms back but don’t have enought left in the tank…well, you know.

    How many times have we seen this so far this year??? Conclusion? Come out hard and focussed EVERY GAME.

    All three of our big guns contributed and the bench looks like one of the better ones in the league again.

    Now let Superman get his on Sunday (you can’t stop him..) but shut down the rest.

    Oh yeah, clothesline VC :-)

    - Gary
  4. 4.

    Can’t get passed you and Doug Smith saying what a wonderful player and guy Vince was, and how the fans should forgive and forget. The fact is, the fans hate Carter for the exact reason they love the play of Pops Mensa-Bonsu. Sorry, but if you-Carter- decide it’s not worth it to go to the basket and roll around every time you get dinged like a soccer player you’re not going to get the love of the Toronto fans (let alone if you request a trade in the meantime). Sorry media, but you can’t program the fans response with a revisionist take on the late Vince Carter.

    - Will, Oshawa
  5. 5.

    Khandor, respectfully, I don’t need a 7 paragraph description of how a 3-man crew works. I’ve been calling / working NBA games (let alone basketball fo quite some time and know the mechanics of the game / the rules of the game).

    My point wasn’t really a matter of who should or shouldn’t make the call as much as it was who truly SAW or DIDN’T SEE the play!

    Even Jonesy agrees (and he’s been playing/coaching/covering basketball for damn-near 40 years) that it’s ridiculous when officials make calls that they clearly didn’t have a “clear” view of — which was the case last night.

    We can avoid the rule book chatter next time :)

    Have a good one

    - Eric Smith
  6. 6.

    Will

    I’m not trying to program anybody. I’m entitled to an opinion just like you are

    You don’t like VC … That’s fine with me!

    If you heard what I said in the interview – and during the post-game as well – then you would have heard me say “if I were in the stands, I’d boo him during the game but cheer him during the ‘ceremony … ”

    For what it’s worth, it won’t matter anyway, ’cause VC has respectfully declined the honouring tomorrow

    - Eric Smith
  7. 7.

    Hi, Eric, and thanks for the reply.

    With all due respect, I, too, will have to say that … based upon what you’ve written there … neither you nor Paul actually knows the technical “mechanics” of how a 3-man crew operates, as far as the technical responsibilities of the Lead, Center and Trail officials are concerned, and which officials are responsible for making what calls in specific areas on the court during a possession, and how these responsibilities shift/change as the play moves from one possession to the next when the officials rotate locations.

    What you said during the broadcast was that according to the vantage point you and Paul had you felt that there was no way the official on the opposite side of the floor could have seen that play through the maze of bodies to make a proper call in the first place … and what I’m saying here is that whether you think that official could actually “see” the play properly is a moot point, since it’s his responsibility to see through those bodies to make that exact call, if according to him he thinks he sees a call that he feels needs to be made in that spcific area of the floor as the Centre Official.

    Although you might not like the presentation of those facts, your opinion doesn’t change whether or not those facts are right or wrong, in the first place.

    You have a good one, as well. :-)

    PS. Btw, please pass along my best wishes to Paul. As a contemporary of his, and his brother’s, I share a similar and passionate dislike for the way certain officials have a tendency to make calls which they really haven’t been able to see clearly in the first place, regardless of where they are on the floor and what their specific jurisdiction might be.

    - khandor
  8. 8.

    no, i’m not wrong. nor is paul wrong. and your use of the word “fact” is not legit either. if you’re reading the rules straight by the book, then, yes, you’re right. but if you’re going by what we saw – and what you didn’t (’cause you weren’t sitting right there with us) – there was no way that official SAW the play clearly. no way.

    thus, again, in theory, you’re right. and trust me, we don’t need a lesson in 3-men crews or the rules of the game (jonesy especially). but the whole root of my point that you’re missing or forgetting is one simple statement: he couldn’t have seen the play. see it, call it. fine. but don’t fabricate things. that was, and still is, my point.

    - Eric Smith
  9. 9.

    Yes this is the “real Jonesy”

    Hey Khandor, thanks for the comments as officiating has long been, ahem, one of my issues.

    As a former official at times when I wasn’t playing back when I could really get up and down the floor, I am probably more aware of the technical responsibilities that you may think. Heck, officials used to tell me to play and not ref when I was playing, as I always took a keen interest in knowing everyone on the floor’s responsibility. Hey, I was a point guard, what can I say.

    I am old enough to remember the advent of the new “3 man crew” and the addition of, as it was called at that time, the “slot” official to catch many of the violations and fouls that occurred in the lane that the trail official could not always see while the lead was focused on action close to the basket.

    I was always told, if you see a violation or a foul, regardless of where you are….call it, particularly if there is a physical advantage as this keeps the game from getting out of hand.

    In that instance, and in many around the NBA, I just think that calls are made based on a perception of a player and at times the personality of a player (don’t get me started on officiating a players personality).

    In that particular instance it just seemed to me (and Eric) that the official could not have truly seen what happened and made the call based on the result (if I recall correctly it was a tardy whistle) and the players involved in the play.

    On Sunday against Orlando, Andrea Bargnani’s 6th foul would never have been called on LeBron, Shaq, Wade, Nowitzki, Kobe, or Kevin Garnett. It may have been called on Rasheed Wallace, or Kenyon Martin…get my point.

    It was interesting to see the official, who shall remain nameless at this time, make a call standing on the near sideline close the hash mark on a play that happened on the far block on the other side of the court where there was minimal contact. He proceded to point his left index finger at a Bargnani who was standing adjacent to Turkoglu as if he were pointing around a corner. Not saying he didn’t see it but in the end, I just wonder if the entertainment value sometimes overrules proper and impartial adjudication of the game.

    The focus on the travel call on a crossover step by a wing man has taken a perfectly good move out of the game. True, there are few players that execute the move properly but when it is done, I often see it whistled as a violation.

    It seems like calls are made for the “good of the moment or the league” at times rather than what actually happened. That being said, its the toughest game int he world to officiate and most of the time they get it right.

    Jonesy

    - Paul Jones
  10. 10.

    Eric and Paul,

    Thanks to both of you for taking the time to reply.

    Unfortunately, and to our mutual chagrin, the perspective of “See the play; make the call, properly,” isn’t how the game is actually officiated.

    Way too many times, at all levels of the game, officials “anticipate” plays happening in a certain manner AND then make the call that fits with THAT perception. When you speak with them after the fact, what they’ll say is, “Sorry, but … the rules read like this, and that’s exactly what I did. What YOU happen to think doesn’t matter, in this instance, as it’s my job [not yours] to follow the rules, as is, not how I happen to think they SHOULD be interpreted.” It can definitely be difficult to deal effectively with an official who is being particularly “officious”. :-)

    One of the beauties of the game, however, is that there are four distinct categories of individuals involved in a specific contest: 1. The players; 2. The coaches; 3. The officials; and, 4. Everybody else … and, while those in Category 4 are certainly “interested” in the job being done by those in Category 3, only those in Categories 2 and 3 [themselves] can have an influence on their actual performance, and it does little good for others to try to do otherwise.

    Btw …

    * Eric, what you’ve been saying lately about Jose Calderon’s individual D being nowhere near as bad as some would seem to suggest, is 100% on the right.

    * Paul, the award which was recently bestowed on you and your brother, together, was richly deserved.

    Keep On Truck’n :-)

    - khandor
Leave a Reply

FOLLOW
SN 590
Facebook Twitter RSS Alerts