Latest news with #FredKatz
New York Times
19-05-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
NBA Eastern Conference finals preview: Knicks-Pacers X-factors, predictions and more
By James L. Edwards III, Fred Katz and Shakeia Taylor The Eastern Conference finals we all anticipated are here. Oh, wait. Is this 2000? The Boston Celtics-Cleveland Cavaliers showdown everyone penciled in months ago isn't happening. Instead, the New York Knicks and Indiana Pacers decided to play spoilers and find themselves with an opportunity to add to a longtime rivalry. Advertisement New York is back in this spot for the first time in 25 years. The Pacers return for the second year in a row, having taken down a depleted Knicks team last season in the second round. This time, both teams are at full strength. To break it all down, three of The Athletic's NBA writers — Shakeia Taylor, who's covered the Pacers this postseason; and Fred Katz and James L. Edwards III, who've followed the Knicks all season — got together to answer five burning questions about the series. Taylor: The Pacers went to Cleveland and took the first two games from the top-seeded Cavaliers, and it looked like the series was theirs from there. In Game 2, Tyrese Haliburton missed a free throw but got the rebound and hit a triple to put the Pacers up one with seconds left to win the game. While teams can only play who is in front of them, Indiana drew a Cavs team that had some health struggles. Darius Garland missed the first two games of the season with a toe injury, and Defensive Player of the Year Evan Mobley and forward De'Andre Hunter missed Game 2. Despite those injuries, Indiana wasn't favored in a single contest. In Game 5, Indiana came back from a 19-point deficit to turn the game on its head. The Pacers took three games on the road en route to their second consecutive East finals appearance. Edwards: A roller coaster is how I'd summarize the Knicks journey. The New York-Boston series was one of the weirdest I can remember in quite some time. Boston lost not one but two 20-point leads late at home in Games 1 and 2. Boston forgot how to shoot in both contests. The Celtics led by 14-plus points in every game except Game 6. The Knicks, despite all of that, had a 3-1 series lead after four games. In Game 5, Luke Kornet turned into prime Dikembe Mutombo, helping Boston offset the loss of NBA ironman Jayson Tatum, who tore his Achilles days earlier. Advertisement New York, in Game 6, did what it hadn't done all postseason, which was completely obliterate its opponent. Mitchell Robinson became prime Shaq. The Knicks played about six flawless quarters of basketball out of 24, and four of those were in the final game. Yet, not only did New York win the series, but also it won it with a game to spare. The Knicks finally clinched a series on their home floor after not doing so in decades. Did I miss anything? New York rose to the occasion, finding a way to do what many people, including myself and Fred, said they couldn't. Katz: The Knicks of today are unlike the group that played during the regular season. The first-round defeat of the Detroit Pistons was a rock fight that hardened New York, six ugly games against a team that thrives in chaos. The Pistons maul you. They set screens. They fight. By the end of that series, it was almost as if Detroit transferred its identity to the Knicks, who emerged grittier than ever. By Round 2, the Knicks fought. They fell down 20 points during each of the first two games against Boston, then won both of them. The Celtics roared to a 14-point lead in Game 4, when they could have tied the series at two games apiece, but the Knicks mounted another comeback that evening, too. With the Eastern Conference finals approaching, it's difficult to pin the Knicks as anything other than tough — physically and mentally. They exchange punches with teams who want to box, and they throttle back from deep deficits when no one else expects it. Taylor: Indiana has to play its own game. Its offense is about playing uptempo and sharing the ball. In the only loss against Cleveland, Cavs coach Kenny Atkinson made an in-game adjustment to a 3-2 zone defense with Mobley at the top of the key, which slowed the Pacers down and stalled their offense. In games where Indiana gets to play fast, it has a much better chance at winning. The Pacers call it the 'wear-down effect.' Advertisement Edwards: The Knicks can't decide that they only want to communicate sometimes. They can't decide that they want to defend every two or three games. New York has told on itself a few times throughout this postseason, most notably in Game 6 against Boston. The Knicks can defend and communicate at a championship level. They just decide that they don't have to do it consistently for some reason. Indiana, as Shakeia said, plays fast, but it's not just that. The Pacers also don't make many mistakes on offense. From Jan. 1 until the end of the regular season, Indiana was one of two teams to rank in the top 10 in pace (ninth), assist-to-turnover ratio (first) and true shooting percentage (eighth). The other team was the Oklahoma City Thunder. New York can be good in transition, but for the most part, it hasn't done it well enough consistently, even dating to the start of the regular season. The Knicks have to be tied together defensively with a consistency that they haven't shown before. Katz: The Knicks' starters need to hold their own against the Pacers' starters. At times, such as during the second half of Game 4 or all of Game 6 against Boston, the Knicks' first unit has dominated. In other moments, it has struggled. New York's starting lineup, which played more than any other unit during the regular season, was a net negative after Christmas. The Pacers are on the other side of the spectrum. Indiana's first unit smacked opponents by 12.2 points per 100 possessions during the regular season, according to Cleaning the Glass. It's been even better in the playoffs. All five first-string Pacers (Haliburton, Andrew Nembhard, Aaron Nesmith, Pascal Siakam and Myles Turner) complement one another. Turner guards the rim and jacks 3-pointers. Nembhard takes on the opponent's highest-usage player and can run the offense. Advertisement Chances are, he will man Jalen Brunson to start the series, though Nesmith will receive time on the All-Star point guard, as well. Nesmith is large, physical and hasn't missed a corner 3 in two years. (Please don't fact-check that.) Siakam would make All-NBA if they added a fourth team. And Haliburton is the fastest-moving low-turnover point guard of his generation. The Knicks are loaded with talent, and they've proved that a large deficit to begin a game doesn't mean a surefire loss is on the way. If they can neutralize Indiana's first unit, they stand a much better chance to move onto the finals. Taylor: Rebounding and second-chance points. Indiana hasn't been very effective on the glass in the postseason, and it's been something the Pacers have pointed to throughout the playoffs as a part of their game that needs cleaning up. They are last among all teams in rebounding rate, while the Knicks have grabbed 30.8 percent of their missed shot attempts. Indiana has allowed 16.2 second-chance points per game in the postseason. Losing the rebounding battle could prove detrimental for the Pacers' hopes of getting past New York. Edwards: The Knicks are at their best when they're able to play fast, but I'm not sure they'll be able to do that much in this series. With that, the half-court offense has to be creative, and players need to cut and move. As I mentioned before, the Pacers don't turn the ball over. One way to get out in transition is by forcing turnovers and, well, that might not happen much in this series. Another way to get out and play fast is by forcing the other team to miss, and, well, Indiana didn't miss a ton in the regular season and has been more efficient in the playoffs. New York, when locked in, can defend as well as any team. Will the Knicks do it enough to get the Pacers out of sorts? We'll have to see. Even then, to keep pace with Indiana, New York's half-court offense has to be better than it has been for most of this postseason. Advertisement Katz: The Pacers' incessant pick-and-roll attack should worry the Knicks. Indiana will score in transition, especially if the Knicks fall victim to the same miscommunications they struggled with at times during the Boston series. If Indiana slays in the half court, too, then New York has a problem. Three pass-first point guards means a trio of heady floor generals to run the offense — and the Pacers can do it in a way that scratches at the Knicks' weaknesses. First, let's guess (emphasis on guess) the defensive matchups: Mikal Bridges on Haliburton, OG Anunoby on Siakam, Josh Hart on Nembhard, Brunson on Nesmith and Karl-Anthony Towns on Turner. Haliburton and Turner would present a scary duo, able to prey on Towns' inconsistent defensive habits. Too often, the Knicks' center will lag back while guarding screeners on pick-and-rolls. Turner, meanwhile, is a 3-point shooter. If Towns strays from him too far, Turner can get hot from deep. The Knicks finished just 26th this season in points allowed per possession while defending pick-and-pops, according to Second Spectrum. But this is not just about Haliburton and Turner's lethal combination. Siakam will confuse defenses when he screens for Haliburton, sometimes holding his picks and at other times rolling to the hoop or popping to the 3-point arc early to catch the opponent by surprise. If Bridges and Anunoby are the Knicks' defenders in that action, New York would probably switch it. Nembhard is an underrated facilitator, capable of facilitating, too. And he won't miss his jumpers in the process. Taylor: Indiana's main X-factor isn't a single person but a few of them: its bench. The Pacers' depth is one of their strengths, especially as they get deeper into a series. This is a team of guys, from No. 1 through No. 11, who share the same mentality, who run, make shots and get after hustle plays. The Indiana bench can make a massive impact on the series as Knicks coach Tom Thibodeau relies on his starters to play big minutes. Advertisement In this year's playoffs, Indiana is averaging 35.7 points off the bench and shooting 48 percent from the field. The Pacers score by committee and had seven players average in double figures in the regular season: Siakam (20.2), Haliburton (18.6), Bennedict Mathurin (16.1), Turner (15.6), Nesmith (12.0), Obi Toppin (10.5) and Nembhard (10.0). Mathurin, Toppin and veteran point guard T.J. McConnell (9.1 ppg) give Indiana reliable scoring off the bench, and their depth also provides defensive options. Katz: The answer seems obvious for the Knicks: Mitchell Robinson. If the oft-injured Robinson dominated a full season the way he did the Celtics, he would be in All-Defense and Sixth Man of the Year conversations. He took away pick-and-rolls, got into passing lanes, deterred jumpers and layups abound and switched onto (then stopped) supposedly quicker perimeter players. But the way Robinson guards — and his growing chemistry alongside Towns in the Knicks' double-big lineup — is only part of the reason he's the go-to answer here. Neither Indiana nor New York turns the ball over much, but the Knicks have a chance to win the possession game because of their work on the boards, which starts with Robinson. The Pacers don't prioritize the offensive glass and finished the regular season in the middle of the pack in defensive rebound rate. Meanwhile, the Knicks are grabbing 39 percent of their own missed shots when Robinson is on the court during the playoffs. If that figure belonged to a team for a full season, it would break the all-time record, which tracks to 1996, when the NBA began keeping per-possession data. It's not just about rebounds, either. The Knicks offense after corralling offensive boards is elite, sixth in the NBA on second-chance efficiency, according to Cleaning the Glass. Advertisement Haliburton, for all his excellence, can prioritize setting up for the outlet pass over boxing out. If he ends up defending Hart by the end of a possession, watch those two once a jumper goes up. Hart crashes the boards incessantly, and if Indiana sends multiple defenders at Robinson to keep him off the glass, it could open up lanes for Hart, a loose-ball fiend. But this starts with Robinson. Edwards: I'm going to go with Robinson, as well. For all of the reasons Fred laid out. And just to add more to the conversation, I'll also toss in Towns as an X-factor. The Knicks will need to find ways to get him to put up more 3s in the half court, assuming New York won't be able to run as much as it would like. A large chunk of Towns' 3s this postseason have come in transition. The Knicks have struggled to generate any for their big man in a half-court setting. On the defensive end, as previously mentioned, New York will need Towns to be consistently focused. He's shown he can do it. Towns had some brilliant moments defensively against Boston, but he also has games where he looks out of sorts on that end. With how Haliburton and Turner play as a pick-and-pop duo, Towns has to be sharp in contesting 3s. And even if New York switches, let's say, with Bridges and Towns on the Haliburton-Turner actions, Haliburton is far more of a driving threat off the dribble than Tatum and Jaylen Brown — both of whom Towns defended well on an island — were in the last series. He has more wiggle as a ballhandler, is a bit quicker and doesn't settle for jumpers like the stars in Boston tend to do. Towns, at the very least, has to pay attention to detail every single game against Indiana. Taylor: Pacers in six. The teams look about even, in my opinion, but I don't expect it to end quickly. A longer series should favor the Pacers, and if their series against the Cavs is any indication — they won three games on the road and weren't rattled by the noise of the Cleveland crowd — I think they have a shot to make their own history. Indiana is fast, physical and hungry, and coach Rick Carlisle's championship experience cannot be overlooked. Edwards: Knicks in seven. Indiana is in the midst of the most dominating playoff run by any team still remaining, and I think that will benefit the Pacers in the first game or two. However, the Knicks are the more talented team with the best player in the series in Brunson. Furthermore, Bridges is a good matchup for Haliburton. Anunoby is the perfect matchup for Siakam. I don't think Nembhard will out Josh Hart Josh Hart. I just don't trust the Pacers' secondary guys to be good enough for long enough, assuming New York only puts up one or two defensive stinkers in this series. And, yes, you have to pencil the Knicks in for a defensive stinker or two. Advertisement Rebounding will be the difference. I have no reason to believe that Robinson will just stop dominating the glass. New York will generate extra possessions from him having his way on the offensive boards. Katz: Knicks in seven. Both of these teams are better than their overarching, regular-season performances. The Pacers finished the year 50-32, tightening up their defense in the process. The Knicks are tougher, grittier, healthier and more technically sound than they were for most of the first 82. I anticipate this coming down to the wire, but even if the Pacers did pull off a Game 7 victory at Madison Square Garden last season (thanks to a historic shooting performance), it's difficult to choose the road team in a close-out game. (Top photo of Jalen Brunson and Pascal Siakam: Michael Hickey / Getty Images)
New York Times
30-04-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
Does the NBA playoffs have a physicality problem? ‘I think it's gone too far'
By Eric Koreen, Fred Katz, Kelly Iko and Law Murray Before Game 2 of his team's series against the Los Angeles Lakers last week, Minnesota Timberwolves coach Chris Finch spoke honestly about the nature of the NBA playoffs. 'If you look around the playoffs right now, it's super physical,' Finch told reporters. 'To me, they've gone way too far on the physicality. I'm not complaining about the way our series, in particular, has been reffed. I'm just saying in general, I … think it's gone too far. It feels like it's physicality on purpose. It's disrupted the flow. If there's not a fight in that Houston-Golden State series, I'd be surprised. That thing feels like it's on the edge every single time.' Advertisement Clearly, the style of game has changed. Five series are being played at dramatically slower paces than the league's slowest team, the Orlando Magic, played in the regular season. There was a fracas that earned the Nuggets and Clippers six technical fouls on Sunday, while the Pistons-Knicks and Rockets-Warriors series have been notably chippy, with technicals and flagrants frequent. Ask the Celtics about how the Magic guarded them and you might get an earful. The Athletic's Eric Koreen, who has been watching from home, Kelly Iko, who is covering the Rockets-Warriors series, Law Murray, who is covering Nuggets-Clippers, and Fred Katz, who is covering Knicks-Pistons, got together to chat about what they've seen. Iko: Have I noticed? Without a doubt. I've seen an uptick in conversations from folks in the NBA praising this year's playoffs and the amount of physicality allowed or tolerated. And I understand why people are excited. I've used the phrase 'attached detachment' before in an NBA context, but it applies to all professional sports. There's an elation that comes from witnessing heightened physicality (and potential violence in some instances), enjoying the competitive aspect of it while not being in danger yourself. That's what these playoffs have been. I'd be a hypocrite to say I don't enjoy physical play. But having extensively covered this Rockets-Warriors series, I'd say there's a limit. It would be one thing if there was some sort of runway up to the postseason — officials letting more go in the second half of the year — but it's been so sudden that it's a surprise. Katz: I've noticed it, and I am ambivalent about it. On one hand, I enjoy 10 world-class athletes battling for loose balls, fighting for rebounds, knocking others around the court in the hopes of winning a game. Healthy, sportsmanlike contentiousness is good for the playoffs. Advertisement However, the way this is happening has the vibe of last year's midseason adjustment, when the NBA decided to enforce foul rules differently and turned the game more physical with time still to go in the regular season. That change caught several teams by surprise. And while this one has a cleaner delineator (the playoffs are always more physical than the regular season), the chasm feels larger than normal. The sport seems different. And teams and players, based purely on conversations I've had with them, seem caught by surprise in a similar fashion to how they were a year ago. A more physical game can be more fun, but the postseason should somewhat resemble the regular season. Otherwise, what's the point of a regular season? Right now, the gap is wide. Koreen: I want to be careful in crediting the physicality with producing the compelling basketball we have seen in the playoffs. As always, it is how much the players care, combined with the ability for teams to specifically scout their opposition and tailor their game plans accordingly, that plays the biggest role in the improvement from the regular season to the playoffs. With that said — and maybe it is because I spent so much time focusing on the worst of what the league has to offer — I have loved playoff basketball. The missed call at the end of Knicks-Pistons Game 4 was lamentable, but missed calls happen. Overall, the extra grime, which necessitates an extra level of offensive execution, has added to the product. Murray: There's definitely more physicality. And I not only enjoy it, I expect it. Every year around the All-Star break, we reach a peak of conflict to figure out why offense feels like global warming. But nature is healing in the spring! I'd argue players have as much to do with it as the officials. The Clippers were top-five in total points allowed this season. Some teams have already been conditioned to bring out an increased level of physicality. Now, it's the playoffs. There are no back-to-backs, there are no cupcakes on the schedule looking toward the lottery, and there's no lack of familiarity. This happens every year, and I'm amused by how shocking it is for some viewers. Advertisement Iko: Physicality helped Houston the most. It's been their identity for the last two seasons under Ime Udoka. Any team that relies on its defensive versatility and intensity to win games has to benefit from added physicality. Now, it sounds somewhat ironic given the Rockets are trailing 3-1 in the series, but Houston has committed the fourth-fewest fouls per game amongst playoff teams. During the regular season, they were just outside the top 10. It's hurt Detroit the most. The Pistons, like the Rockets, are on the brink of elimination, but Detroit leaned too hard into that brand of basketball. That's an especially difficult task to complete when Isaiah Stewart, the beacon of bullyball, has been out injured. The Pistons have opened an emotional door, getting too invested in winning some of these skirmishes and having less control over the actual basketball going on. Katz: It will help the Thunder the most. Their greatest strength just became stronger and their greatest weakness became less relevant. Despite all the accusations hurled at supposed free-throw merchant Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, the Thunder do not live at the line. It's quite the opposite. No one had a less favorable free-throw differential during the regular season. Now, the league's best defense can bump into opponents with fewer repercussions. I'll say it hurts the Lakers the most. No team goes smaller than Los Angeles and switches more frequently with like-minded defenders. The Lakers led the NBA in free-throw attempt rate; that rate falls in these circumstances. We think of physicality as affecting only defense, but it hits the other side of the ball, too. The Timberwolves are shoving around Lakers defenders with screeners and drivers, creating buckets for themselves. It's a significant reason Minnesota is up 3-1 heading into Wednesday's game. Koreen: Long term, give me the Oklahoma City Thunder, as if they need the help. The Thunder already had the best defense in the league in the regular season. If Lu Dort, Alex Caruso and Jalen Williams are allowed to be even more handsy? Watch out. Meanwhile, this could hurt Cleveland down the road. I love the Cavaliers' roster. But the more reliant you are on smaller guards to score, the more physicality could hurt you. The same can be said for teams lacking depth — the Lakers, Nuggets and Knicks. Murray: It helps the teams that are already physical and embrace physicality. The Magic play the least aesthetically pleasing basketball in the NBA. They allowed the fewest points in the league, while only the Nets and Hornets averaged fewer points scored per game than Orlando. They can't hit the broad side of a barn, and yet here they were making the Boston Celtics sweat out a quarterfinal series. The Thunder play defense like the Legion of Boom Seattle Seahawks used to cover wide receivers. The refs can't call every pass interference and the Thunder know it. Advertisement On the flip side, the added physicality hurts the teams that can't adjust. Look no further than the two eighth seeds. The Heat and Grizzlies gave the people nonchalant regular-season basketball, and got thrown out the club as a result. Iko: Game 4 in Rockets-Warriors was it for me. The first three games felt like it was gradually building up to a boiling point, which happened on Monday night. At one point during the second quarter, my friend Monte Poole, who has covered the Warriors for years, leaned over and shouted, 'Can we just get back to basketball?' There was just so much going on in that game that had nothing to do with anything meaningful. Steph Curry taunting Dillon Brooks, who incited a mini riot. Jimmy Butler and Brooks jawing back and forth, leading to an elbow to the throat and slight shove to the ground. Draymond Green and Tari Eason getting tangled up, grabbing at legs and stepping over each other. Big men Steven Adams and Quinton Post got in on the action. At one point, there were more stoppages to review for hostile acts than made buckets. It was a complete mess. Katz: Let's take the final play of Knicks-Pistons Game 4. Cade Cunningham missed a jumper. Tobias Harris shoved Josh Hart away from the ball on the rebound attempt, which the league ruled a correct no-call in its last two-minute report. The ball trickles to the corner, where Tim Hardaway Jr. picks it up. Hardaway rises for a jumper as Hart closes out and bumps him. Again, there's no call, and the Knicks win by one as Hardaway's jumper doesn't hit the rim. After the game, crew chief David Guthrie acknowledged that referees should have called a foul on Hart. And in a vacuum, Guthrie is correct. Hart brushed into Hardaway when he was going up for the shot, a textbook foul. But here's the problem: If you listed the most intrusive non-fouls that could have been fouls throughout that game, I'm not sure the Hart-on-Hardaway play even makes the top 10. To be clear, I thought that game was well officiated, fair and consistent for both sides, which is the most important part of the job. But when the officials announce after the game that they missed one call at the end, even though that no-call was consistent with the way they called the game all night, there may be a discrepancy. Advertisement Koreen: There were some moments early in the Rockets-Warriors series that barely resembled basketball. As Kelly noted, that continued on Monday. We shouldn't be surprised, given some of the involved parties, but that series started off as a slog. It has been a reminder that you only want to go so far in bringing back the '80s and '90s. Beyond that, while I have some specific complaints about officiating, I haven't found play to be dirtier than in other postseasons. I didn't love Rudy Gobert delivering a forearm shiver to LeBron James' head after James threw his hip into him on a box out, but I don't think that's a huge outlier from playoffs past. Gobert got a flagrant, as he should have. Murray: I love telling people that I was a referee as part of my work study as an undergrad. I know how hard officiating a game is. But I also know players pick up on patterns of how certain refs facilitate games. I'm not comfortable with how inconsistent some of these games get, or how officials have to overcorrect to regain control of a game. I don't like how you know Draymond Green isn't going to get ejected despite putting out a mixtape of physicality that is usually only available on pay-per-view. That's the physicality that crosses the line. The officials have to maintain the integrity of the game. Establish what is permitted, warn players (and coaches) to play basketball, and hold them accountable accordingly. We all see what's happening out there. Iko: It would change how teams approach scouting. There might be more of an onus on seasoned players who play multiple positions and foul more. As far as current NBA players go, the modern floor-spacing big, more of a finesse type, could be phased out in favor of the traditional rim-to-rim bruiser — a world with more Steven Adams and less Nikola Vučević. Katz: Maybe teams would have to prioritize Nos. 11 through 15 on the roster more. This is the age of rest and load management. If games are more exhausting, then it's possible load management or legitimate injuries increase, and that player on a two-way contract you haven't heard of could end up in the rotation. Advertisement Koreen: A more physical standard would only increase the need for physical, multi-positional defenders. Players like that, especially ones who can shoot, are already prized. With some rules loosened, their value would rise. I also think more traditional bigs would gain value, but not because teams would simply be dumping the ball into the post more often. Rather, excellent screensetting would become crucial in freeing up perimeter scorers. The value of shooting wouldn't change, but on- and off-ball screens become so important at this time of year. Murray: That should have already been the case. You build teams with two seasons in mind: the grind of an 82-game regular season, and the grind of the playoffs when only one team will win 16 games. You need skill, but you need the positional size to go with that skill. Defense validates your lineups. And the equalizer to height-weight-speed are players who play hard and through contact effectively on both ends. No one is bringing the goon back to rosters any time soon, but you're not building a team that can't bump either. Just ask the Phoenix Suns how far that can get you. Iko: It can be good, given the right parameters. One of the biggest complaints from people who subscribe to the plummeting ratings argument is that today's game is too soft, with foul-grifting at an all-time high. Dialing some of that back, while celebrating controlled physicality, would do the league some good, I think. The officials have done a solid job in preventing some of these dust-ups from spilling over. Now, you could argue that players aren't really 'about that life' and are just getting in each other's faces for theatrics. But I've enjoyed this playoff campaign in ways I didn't in recent years, and that's directly correlated to added physicality. Advertisement Katz: I'm into more physicality, in general. My only critique is that it should be explicit. I sense that players are a bit taken aback by the enforcement of the rules now. Every rule change for the past two decades has been in favor of the offense. The league wouldn't be the only ones to believe it's gone too far in that direction. But turning basketball into boxing isn't the only way to help a defense. The NBA could bring back some of the old rules. Allow handchecking again or get rid of defensive three-seconds. Koreen: It's fair to say that what is allowed in the regular season has to be closer to what is allowed in the playoffs, and vice versa. As I stated above, there are reasons for the difference in styles that go beyond what is being called and what is not, but we have probably veered too far toward allowing physicality. As well, there's a lack of consistency within games that is troubling, and that is often what leads to melees and complaints. Overall, I think this is good for the league. Give me a little more sense of rivalry, competitiveness and, sure, bad blood. Murray: It's fine. There will be complaints about the game no matter how it's played. If teams were averaging 120 points per game, there would be complaints. If teams were struggling to get to 100 points, there would be clamors for rule changes. Defense is physicality. I see teams playing hard and realizing that if they don't, they get to book Cancun shortly.
