Question for Dviss about 3 in the key

Funny they used to get Brandon Roy for that one all the time.

There are lots of misconceptions about that rule too.

 

I do like how refs don't really call either unless it's stupid egregious and gives huge advantage. Travelling on an uncontested fast break dunk? Who gives a fuck. Shifting the pivot feet like a ballerina in the post? Call that shit.

 

Wouldn't the travel on an uncontested fast break dunk give them an unfair advantage of 2 points though? Just saying.

 

No, becuase they'd score the two points if they'd taken an extra dribble and done less awesome dunk. Why penalize a player for giving the fans some value for the two points they'd have scored anyway?

 

Fuck that.

I remember that game we played against the Celtics last year (when Evan Turner hit that game winner) when a guy took 3 full on steps with no defense on a fast break....

Muthafucka..

You are one of the most athletic people in the world. You know the damn rules and there's NO DEFENSE...

Take 2 steps or take your ass home. You can do it! Shit...

That shit is really weak to me.

 

I can see where it'd be infuriating, but I just can't get up the gumption to be mad about it. Dame and Cj get away with a lot imho travel-wise.

 

Because it's against the rules?

Was this a tounge-in-cheek response? It was difficult to ascertain.

 

I love you. Can I go to a game with you, please?

 

I'm serious, but I'm not a rules absolutist.

We've already seen that "against the rules" is completely open for interpretation in basketball; look at this thread. I'm not going to give a fuck about three steps on an uncontested fast break. I do care if it's contested or in the half court though.

 

They have multiple videos of people taking 7 steps. SEVEN. 3? Okay. 7? GTFO.

 

Those players should be ridiculed, but just because they forgot to dribble doesn't mean they'd miss a fucking dunk if they did dribble.

 

What? lol. That doesn't pass the logic test in the world of rule abidement.

 

There's a logic test?

 

Logically, there should be.

 

My logic test:

GIVEN: All whistles are blown based on advantage gained...

Step 1: Determine Advantage Gained
-Does the player gain an advantage by breaking the letter of the rule?

In a situation like posting up, shuffling the feet or switching pivot feet is a HUGE advantage because it negates the defensive player's positional work.
In a situation like a contested fast break, traveling gives advantage because the player's got the ball held tight so as not to get stolen from the defender.
In an uncontested fast break dunk, the player gains no advantage from not dribbling. They still have to jump and not hit the rim. That part happens regardless.

Step 2: Blow the whistle as needed (or if you're a fan, freak the fuck out at the missed call)

In this case, I choose not to freak the fuck out, because no advantage was gained.

I'm not a moron or a monster; blown goaltending, out of bounds, and advantage-gained violations piss me off. But I choose not to care about traveling on an uncontested dunk, because logically, it doesn't matter. I'm talking about "no defender on that side of the court, dude's all alone dunking" situations.

 

My logic test...if I don't like something, it probably sucks

 

Isn't cheating by the very definition an advantage gained illegally though?

 

Look at that the other way around: An advantage gained illegally is cheating. If no advantage is gained, it can't be cheating.

 

So glass half full vs half empty? I ok with 3 steps in the example above but 7 goes too far for me. So I might not be able to look at it the other way around. LOL

 

That's why you should always try to defend on the fast break. If that shit's even a little contested and the guy takes seven steps, he should get called for traveling because now there's an advantage to be gained.