From: lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor)
Subject: Re: Talk about bias... (was Re: game decided on last play)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:06:01 GMT

Meeks' 14th lie: article #14 post-stop.

In article <1992Aug12.183616.71542@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks) writes:
>So, ... The Bulls with Jordan and Pippen (two all-stars, Olympians, etc..) 
>aren't up there?  
They were up there only since 89/90, which covers about 1/4 of the time
span we talk about.

>Detroit???  
Only since 1987/88, about 1/3 or 1/2 of the time span we talk about.

>What about teams like Philadelphia and Milwaukee
>and others in the early 80s??  I guess Dr. J didn't qualify, nor did Moses, 
>etc...  
Philadelphia? not there since Moses was gone, about 1/2 of the time span
we talk about.

Milwaukee? When have Milwaukee had the HOF roster of Boston have had?

>If we go all the back to the early 80s, there are a lot of superstar
>players, many of which are HOF/potential HOF players.  
Really? like which team had that many HOF players? You name it.

>So, the Bird play happened AFTER THE BUZZER???
The decision (call) was made AFTER THE BUZZER.

>But this is not something you can determine at this point.  Neither Bird
>nor Magic (or Jordan) were HOF players in the early 80s.  They were superstars
>that have had careers that have made them legends.  Many of the players listed
>may very well become HOF players, only time will tell.  You look in retrospect
>and try to apply EdLorian logic on them now.  Did Bird/Magic/Jordan get
>superstar favoratism in the early 80s because the refs knew they were going
>to the HOF???
Let me see. Bird/Magic/Jordan have been legends, none of the active players
(besides Moses) is right now. So they have been enjoying legend favoritism.

Before 1984, Bird's first MVP/playoff MVP, he was only a 4-time 1st team
all-NBA, 4 all-star game appearances, a key cog of a powerhouse that
finished with the best record 3 times and a championship once. That's 
still a status none of the current superstars (Karl Malone, Barkley, Ewing,
Mullin) have enjoyed, never mind the likes of Chuck Person, Danny Manning.
So even before the legend favoritism, he was enjoying more superstar 
favoritism than the current crop of superstars.

In other words, only one other player's favoritism can match Bird's since
the Bird/Magic era. 

>>1) do not have players of HOF-caliber
>I don't know, I would say a lot of the players listed have HOF potential.
Oh, like Chuck Person/Derek Harper/Mitch Richmond? Even if (big if) I buy
that, they still can't be superior to the likes of Parish/McHale/DJ/Tiny/
Walton.  The Celtics had 4-5 on the team at the same time. You better include
4-5 Indiana Pacers (e.g. Smits, Person, Reggie, Williams) as HOF potential 
to match that.

>>Oh, you mean judgement in enforcing the rules? That's not the judgement 
>>call we are talking about.
>Can't really seperate the two, except in a perfect world.  When dealing with
>human judgement in enforcing the rules, the whole situation becomes a
>judgement call.  
Why not? If the judgement is in the rule definition, the refs is not
faulted as long as he is consistent, e.g. strike zone, pass interference,
fouls in basketball and hockey, etc. If not, the refs is faulted when he 
makes a wrong call, even though he is consistent. In other words, if he 
calls 3-ptrs on all ten 3-pt attempts with the foot on the line, then he will 
be faulted ten times.

>So now you are saying that I admitted that the list of BG calls are just 
>home jobs???  No, I admitted that the "types of things" you conisder bogus
>are nothing but home jobs that happen everywhere.  
That's not what you said on 7/2.

>And where did I say the
>7 calls were "bad calls".   Talk about strawman arguments...
"So, in the history of the game, the current ratio is 7 bad calls for 
Bostons favor, 3 for ...."

>>Yep, you can do that. I hope you can assemble your list of bogus calls
>>for every team from 1980-1992 too, the period of our argument.
>Don't need to.  Just need to list 7 calls I consider bogus for each team 
>during this period, as that was the list you  provided.
Yep, go ahead. You have been saying that you would do that since June.
When are you going to turn in your assignment?

How is this different from "it's time this thread stopped" or "further 
e-mail will be resulted in contacting your postmaster"?

I just can't wait.

-- 
                                          Edward Lor
                                          lor@cbnewsk.att.com
                                          
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro