***2021-2022 NBA Season Thread***

[Renegade7]

omg, ESPN is retarded.  "Does LeBron need to play minor league baseball to help match Jordan's legacy".  

 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

The 3 has made the long 2 the worst shot in basketball. Can’t wait to see the entire 2 point jumper disappear when a dunk becomes 3 pts. 

 

Might as well just put trampolines in the court and go full slamball 

—

also, if dunks increase, it ruins part of  what makes them special. 

 

This is is a terrible idea all around 

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

How does it make it worse?  You don't think they're going to be giving full effort to make the dunk either way?  Isn't giving full effort to dunk it what everyone would want to see?

You're stuck on how cool this is not if it really makes sense.

 

I can see it now, down with one play left and couple seconds and once the ball comes in everyone forms a giant blob under the hoop with people not paying attention to where people's feet are and the wide open three just sitting there.  We don't have to agree, I don't like this, don't want it. It's interesting looking online with people's opinions on this, its all "that sound awesome", but no cost benefit analysis.  This won't be all good, it won't be all bad, but I can't even guarantee its a net positive once this all starts to settle in as a rule change like that almost necessitates overthinking it.

 

Like I said, I want a team that can play inside and outside.  This will discourage that.  If you'd rather a league focused on dunks then every other way to score the basketball, more power to you, but I'm not with you on this one.

[Destino]

7 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

The 3 has made the long 2 the worst shot in basketball. Can’t wait to see the entire 2 point jumper disappear when a dunk becomes 3 pts. 

 

Might as well just put trampolines in the court and go full slamball 

—

also, if dunks increase, it ruins part of  what makes them special. 

 

This is is a terrible idea all around 

The long 2 is hated, but so many late game clutch shots are long 2's.  I think the key is that you don't want role players and bad shooters taking these shots, but stars that can reliably hit these shots are never going to stop taking them.  A pull up jump shot is an essential part of any star that creates most of their own offense. 

[Going Commando]

1 minute ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

The 3 has made the long 2 the worst shot in basketball. Can’t wait to see the entire 2 point jumper disappear when a dunk becomes 3 pts. 

 

How does making a dunk worth three change what's already happened to the long 2?  Beyond that, you seem to think that guys can dunk at will and that they're turning them down when they have the opportunity to do it.  Dunking is hard man.  And when an NBA player who can dunk finally gets one lined up, he takes it because it's a satisfying way to finish and it has aesthetic value--the fans love it and it goes on highlight reels.

 

You really think we should continue to let inside play go extinct in an attempt to preserve the aesthetic value of the long 2?  lol.

 

Another thing: inside play has strong natural disincentives because it is so much more physically demanding than face up/perimeter play.  Not only does it require a more elaborate and complex set of skills than catching and shooting perimeter jumpers, it is so much more exhausting.  We always complain when bigs who used to be exciting inside players develop a face up game and get soft and hang out on the perimeters.  But we don't acknowledge that everything about the game incentivizes them to do this.  It's both more competitive and much easier on their body and thus they can prolong their careers.  Our competitive incentives should work the other way around, and they should be rewarded for going into the paint and getting their asses kicked.

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Like I said, I want a team that can play inside and outside.  This will discourage that.  

 

I'm sorry, but this is absolutely wrong.  Incentivizing inside play to match the overwhelming incentive that outside play already enjoys will encourage inside play.  How on Earth do you think it would actually discourage that?

[Destino]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

It just doesn't make sense that a twerp like Steph Curry is exponentially more valuable than a freak like Giannis Antetokounpo simply because of a flawed, outdated set of rules.  It's bad for the sport.

It doesn't make sense that the best shooter in NBA history with some of the best handles in the game is more valuable than a freakish athlete that isn't terribly skilled and is still considered a work in progress?  If you love the "sport" then your logic is exactly ass backwards. 

[Renegade7]

12 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I'm sorry, but this is absolutely wrong.  Incentivizing inside play to match the overwhelming incentive that outside play already enjoys will encourage inside play.  How on Earth do you think it would actually discourage that?

Ugh, this entire conversation, and you think what I'm saying is that allowing a 4 point dunk won't encourage more inside play just shows you aren't listening to me, you're talking past me.  

 

Stop trying to be right all the GD time, you're not, none of us are.  You're better then this.

Edited May 12, 2018 by Renegade7

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, Destino said:

It doesn't make sense that the best shooter in NBA history with some of the best handles in the game is more valuable than a freakish athlete that isn't terribly skilled and is still considered a work in progress?  If you love the "sport" then your logic is exactly ass backwards. 

 

LOL, the modern NBA game has been a slow, steady perversion of the sport.  It's eliminated the value of low post play by absurdly overvaluing perimeter shooting.  It marginalized the value of the ability to get to the hoop off the dribble and finish over the defense.

 

One skill shouldn't be vastly more valuable than all of the others, as is the case today.  And the result is we've got an ugly, soft, chuck-fest of a game, and the pinnacle of this style of play is about to play out in an unwatchable WCF.  If you think watching a bunch of 6'5 guys chuck threes on lazy possessions 40 times a game and then jump into defenders the other 40 is worth loving and preserving, then we're going to agree to disagree.

20 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Ugh, this entire conversation, and you think what I'm saying is that allowing a 4 point dunk won't encourage more inside play just shows you aren't listening to me, you're talking past me.  

 

Stop trying to be right all the GD time, you're not, none of us are.  You're better then this.

 

We're having an argument right?  Either make a claim that doesn't contradict itself or there isn't any point.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

36 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

You really think we should continue to let inside play go extinct in an attempt to preserve the aesthetic value of the long 2?  lol.

 

That isnt what I said. I was commenting on 2s in general. You mentioned that dunks are hard but they will be more attempted regardless as the risk vs reward is now more slanted in favor of the dunk. The mentality will change to get inside at all costs and try to dunk. If a player can try to drive and dunk vs take a jumper, they’ll try to dunk.

 

Fouls will increase, foul outs will increase. Bad alley oop attempts will increase. Games will get longer and slower. 

 

Inside play will come back around again I’m sure at some point. This isn’t the way to do it or improve the game 

5 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

unwatchable WCF.

 

Thats crazy, I’m more excited about this matchup than I’ve been for a playoff series in a long time 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Momma There Goes That Man

[Renegade7]

6 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

We're having an argument right?  Either make a claim that doesn't contradict itself or there isn't any point.

The only person that thinks I'm contradicting myself is you, and its because you don't care what I'm saying anyway.  I thought we were having a debate, not an argument.  Do you even know the difference when you're that adamant you're right?

 

Edit:  You just misunderstood Momma, too.  Slow the F down, we're you're boys, why you going to war against us on something trivial like this?

Edited May 12, 2018 by Renegade7

[Going Commando]

24 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

If a player can try to drive and dunk vs take a jumper, they’ll try to dunk.

 

I don't think this is a bad thing at all.

 

24 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Fouls will increase, foul outs will increase. Bad alley oop attempts will increase. Games will get longer and slower. 

 

I'm not convinced that the games would actually get longer and slower, because teams are already avoiding pull up jumpers to try and take it inside for the foul.  And I'm not sure it would actually be a bad thing for fouls and foul outs to increase because a more physical style of play would be more fun to watch.

 

24 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Inside play will come back around again I’m sure at some point. This isn’t the way to do it or improve the game 

 

This isn't a problem of a lack of worthy big man talent any more.  It's a problem of math, and it isn't going away without rule changes.  It's an imbalance in the rules that values perimeter play significantly more that came about following the creation of the three point line.  It's been one slow, steady progression to this point, and the only thing that kept this change from happening two decades earlier was that we first went through an ISO ball era before the league realized the game had become an unwatchable one on one contest and they changed the illegal defense rules to let weak side bigs pack the paint.  This killed off the value of low post play once and for all, and the natural evolution has been to a game of three ball shooting.

 

So, how do you re-incentivize inside play without hurting the value of perimeter play in response?  Make an aspect of specialized inside play worth as much as an aspect of specialized perimeter play, and base the increased value on degree of difficulty, same as it is with the three point line.  I'm open to other suggestions that achieve the same effect, but I don't think any of them will be cleaner or simpler or easier to implement than making dunks worth three.

 

It's a natural improvement that should have happened decades ago.  It's the most prestigious play in the game of basketball and its competitive value should have always reflected that truth.

 

24 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Thats crazy, I’m more excited about this matchup than I’ve been for a playoff series in a long time 

 

This match up is way better on paper than it will be to actually watch.  That's true of every Rockets game now.  The appeal comes from the hope that it will be Golden State's first truly competitive series in two years, not the style of play.

Edited May 12, 2018 by stevemcqueen1

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I'm open to other suggestions that achieve the same effect, but I don't think any of them will be cleaner or simpler or easier to implement than making dunks worth three.

In IT, a bad plan is not better then no plan until you have a good one.  This is Change Management 101, and ignoring this golden gets people fired.  

 

Again, your concern is not invalid, your solution just feels like overkill and there are people in here trying to explain how at minimum it will backfire as well.

[Destino]

45 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

LOL, the modern NBA game has been a slow, steady perversion of the sport.  It's eliminated the value of low post play by absurdly overvaluing perimeter shooting.  It marginalized the value of the ability to get to the hoop off the dribble and finish over the defense.

 

One skill shouldn't be vastly more valuable than all of the others, as is the case today.  And the result is we've got an ugly, soft, chuck-fest of a game, and the pinnacle of this style of play is about to play out in an unwatchable WCF.  If you think watching a bunch of 6'5 guys chuck threes on lazy possessions 40 times a game and then jump into defenders the other 40 is worth loving and preserving, then we're going to agree to disagree.

key word is "skill" and the NBA has never required more of it.  Centers that can't shoot, dribble, or hit a foul shot have never been more useless offensively.  Bulk doesn't count for nearly as much.  All of these changes are great for the sport, because professional basketball players should have basic basketball skills.  Highly skilled bigs were once extremely rare oddities, now they're everywhere.  Back in you imagined golden age a lot of these great super athletes would have been parked on the low post, because that's what tall guys have to do.  

 

And one skill is not vastly more valuable than every other.  Curry is the best shooter ever and he's not the best player of his era.  

 

If you think powering to the rim without having to dribble or shoot is so perfect, then maybe there's a better fit than basketball out there. :

 

I agree about drawing fouls though.  They need to get that under control because guys prioritizing drawing fouls over scoring when the ball is in play, is just awful basketball.  

[Momma There Goes That Man]

30 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I'm not convinced that the games would actually get longer and slower, because teams are already avoiding pull up jumpers to try and take it inside for the foul.  And I'm not sure it would actually be a bad thing for fouls and foul outs to increase because a more physical style of play would be more fun to watch.

 

More fouls would easily make the games longer and slower. I’ve seen the nba officiating and you’re a big critic of it on here, you want these refs making calls on 35-40% more dunk attempts? That would be a disaster especially when it removes the incentive of dunking for extra pts anyway. Now we are getting more hard fouls, more flagrants, more injuries as well to avoid giving up the 3 and 4 pt play (and 1 dunk)

 

But mostly the problem with this is that you are suggesting the nba product is better with more dunks. I disagree with that idea completely.I don’t watch the nba to watch dunks. I watch the nba to see the most skilled players in the world do amazing things with their skills. Not every player should be prioritizing going to the paint over a jumper but it’s worth it now because it’s 3pts or an easy trip to the line plus you rack up fouls on the inside defenders. 

 

I genuinely don’t see any good coming from that rule change 

30 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

So, how do you re-incentivize inside play without hurting the value of perimeter play in response? 

 

Do we even need to? Let the bright minds like Pop, Stevens etc figure out how to maximize a big or inside play and that will eventually start to bring it back in. 

 

Or eventually someone like Shaq will come along again, (just as in a physical force in the paint) that can’t be guarded with most current smaller lineups and stretch bigs. That will start it again. 

 

Plus, I don’t really think the game is broken right now. I don’t care to see post up games and backing a defender down all the time like t used to be. Let it fly. Some players like Russ and Bron get to the paint and use their athleticism to dunk and that’s part of what makes it exciting. Seeing the greats use their talents to posterize somebody not that everybody does tries to do it. Same thing with posting up. 

 

No offense man, I’m usually in agreement with you but I hate this idea 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Momma There Goes That Man

[Going Commando]

14 minutes ago, Destino said:

key word is "skill" and the NBA has never required more of it.  Centers that can't shoot, dribble, or hit a foul shot have never been more useless offensively.  

 

Playing in the low post IS a skill.  A complex and highly developed one.  And its value has been killed off because the NBA chose to value another particular skill--shooting a long jump shot--much more.  And because they changed the defensive rules to make being able to create shots with your back to the basket useless.

 

Do you think it's good that there is absolutely no place for a once in a blue moon big bodied seven footer with a fully grown post game at 19 years old like Jahlil Okafor in today's NBA?

 

Do you think it's good for the game that a truly special athlete like Aaron Gordon isn't much more than a novel role player, and that Blake Griffin completely abandoned his breathtaking inside game for an ugly perimeter shooting game?  These guys have awesome skills whose rarity and difficulty are not reflected in their competitive value.

 

Do you think it's good for the game that if you were to plop prime Hakeem Olajuwon down in the NBA right now, he wouldn't even sniff an MVP, much less the HoF?  He'd be Rudy Gobert or DeAndre Jordan.  Tim Duncan is going to be the last center for a very long time to make the Hall, and he'll probably be remembered as a PF.  That is sad.

 

In every era of basketball except this one, the center was the most valuable position.  We have swung completely away from that, to the point where they are nothing more than defensive specialists, and it happened as a direct result of rules changes, and it's made the game much softer and less appealing.

 

And at any rate, making dunks worth three wouldn't lessen the value of being able to dribble.  It would actually enhance it because it would reward face up drives and post moves which generate the chance to finish above the rim.

[Dr. Do Itch Big]

You saying Rudy’s and DeAndres post game is as good or remotely anywhere near The Dreams. You high af. DeAndre go to move is dunking lobs. 

[Going Commando]

16 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Or eventually someone like Shaq will come along again, (just as in a physical force in the paint) that can’t be guarded with most current smaller lineups and stretch bigs. That will start it again. 

 

That guy already came along and his name is Joel Embiid and he spends way too much time camped out on the perimeter, trying to shoot threes.

 

Again, this is an issue of rules changes and math.  There isn't going to be any big man savior that will come along and refocus the game on post play.

 

20 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

More fouls would easily make the games longer and slower. I’ve seen the nba officiating and you’re a big critic of it on here, you want these refs making calls on 35-40% more dunk attempts? That would be a disaster especially when it removes the incentive of dunking for extra pts anyway. Now we are getting more hard fouls, more flagrants, more injuries as well to avoid giving up the 3 and 4 pt play (and 1 dunk)

 

Again, I'm not convinced that it would actually lead to more fouling because guys are already totally incentivized to seek out contact and get to the FT line instead of pulling up for jumpers.  Increasing the value of made dunks would actually increase the incentive to finish your shot and thus avoid contact and avoid having to settle for just two points when you could get three or even four.

 

And the game is so soft now.  Guys in older eras managed to survive with much more physical inside play and much looser rules about flagrant fouls and fighting.

 

26 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

But mostly the problem with this is that you are suggesting the nba product is better with more dunks. I disagree with that idea completely.I don’t watch the nba to watch dunks. I watch the nba to see the most skilled players in the world do amazing things with their skills. Not every player should be prioritizing going to the paint over a jumper but it’s worth it now because it’s 3pts or an easy trip to the line plus you rack up fouls on the inside defenders. 

 

Dunking on someone isn't an example of an NBA player doing an amazing thing with their skill?  It's already worth it to go inside and try and draw fouls, the difference is now we'd actually be rewarding the guys who are good enough to finish above the rim.  I already agreed that you should only get the third point if you make the dunk and that missed dunks shouldn't be rewarded with three free throws.

 

46 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Some players like Russ and Bron get to the paint and use their athleticism to dunk and that’s part of what makes it exciting. Seeing the greats use their talents to posterize somebody not that everybody does tries to do it. Same thing with posting up.

 

Nobody is posting up any more because the end of illegal defense has allowed a weakside big to camp around the lane and easily double down on post ups.

 

I wish everybody played the game with the aggressiveness and physicality that Westbrook, LeBron, and Giannis do.  They are the most exciting players in the game by far.  But there is no competitive incentive whatsoever to be like them.  They're just nut job freaks of nature who get off on power dunking.  They have an extremely rare and breathtaking skill that puts butts in seats and eyes on TVs.  Well, let's reward them for it in the same way that the game rewards Steph Curry for his special skill.  Why is it that one rare and highly specialized skill should have outsized competitive value and not others?

 

Let's go down the hierarchy a bit to drive home how warped the game has become.  Should we be satisfied with the rules of an NBA that make a trash ass journeyman six foot role player like Kyle Lowry a much more valuable player than a genuine athletic marvel like Andre Drummond?  Because that is the world we are living in right now.

31 minutes ago, Dr. Do Itch Big said:

You saying Rudy’s and DeAndres post game is as good or remotely anywhere near The Dreams. You high af. DeAndre go to move is dunking lobs. 

 

No.  I'm saying that Hakeem's post game has no value in today's NBA because every team would successfully defend him by shading a weak side helper off of him and doubling him on the catch and forcing him to pass back out.

 

The NBA tried to get rid of Iversons in 2001 and, in doing so, they also got rid of Hakeems.

[Destino]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Playing in the low post IS a skill.  A complex and highly developed one.  And its value has been killed off because the NBA chose to value another particular skill--shooting a long jump shot--much more.  And because they changed the defensive rules to make being able to create shots with your back to the basket useless.

It is "a skill" but being able to dribble, shoot, and pass is a "skilled" basketball player.  Embiid has a low post game, and uses it, but it's one skill of many.  That's the way it should be.  Low post offense is no longer granted a special status that allows centers to forgo learning all other basketball skills and still be superstars.  

 

Quote

Do you think it's good that there is absolutely no place for a once in a blue moon big bodied seven footer with a fully grown post game at 19 years old like Jahlil Okafor in today's NBA?

He's not playing because he doesn't appear interested in playing basketball.  He tries to score when he gets the ball and pretty much nothing else.  There are bad centers playing all over the league, imagine how bad Okafor is for coaches to think his offenses ability isn't enough to make up for it.

 

Quote

Do you think it's good for the game that a truly special athlete like Aaron Gordon isn't much more than a novel role player, and that Blake Griffin completely abandoned his breathtaking inside game for an ugly perimeter shooting game?  These guys have awesome skills whose rarity and difficulty are not reflected in their competitive value.

Aaron Gordon is a great athlete, but not a great basketball player.  Lebron is a great athlete, and he's the best basketball player of his era.  Javale McGee is an amazing athlete that's built like he was designed to play basketball.  So is Rudy Gobert.  One of them is a great defender the other one is awful.  That's how it works.  Running fast and jumping high isn't enough.  

 

Blake changed his game after several injuries.  It's fairly standard for athletes to add to their game as they age and lose athleticism.  

 

Quote

Do you think it's good for the game that if you were to plop prime Hakeem Olajuwon down in the NBA right now, he wouldn't even sniff an MVP, much less the HoF?  He'd be Rudy Gobert or DeAndre Jordan.  Tim Duncan is going to be the last center for a very long time to make the Hall, and he'll probably be remembered as a PF.  That is sad.

Did you just compare DeAndre and Gobert to The Dream?  Nope.  No no no.  Just no.  

 

Quote

In every era of basketball except this one, the center was the most valuable position.  We have swung completely away from that, to the point where they are nothing more than defensive specialists, and it happened as a direct result of rules changes, and it's made the game much softer and less appealing.

How can you believe that and that Embiid and the 76ers will dominate the East?  

 

 

[Renegade7]

I thought the reason ya'll were gushing over Embiid was because he could dominate inside AND shoot the three, basically making it impossible for a traditional 5 to stay with him.  By leaving the rules the way they are, it's taken a while, but its forcing players to have multiple skillsets to be relevant.  

 

Rewarding players for being one-dimensional sounds like going backwards.  

Edited May 12, 2018 by Renegade7

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I swear I thought everybody was rejoicing that we got back to passing and jump shooting instead of the iso just drive to the basket and try to dunk stuff of the late 90s and early 00s. 

 

Now the game is boring and we should go back to everybody and their mother trying to dunk? Ugh

Edited May 12, 2018 by Momma There Goes That Man

[TradeTheBeal!]

McQueen is wild these days.

 

Hes on some different level.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

• 1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Again, I'm not convinced that it would actually lead to more fouling because guys are already totally incentivized to seek out contact and get to the FT line instead of pulling up for jumpers.  Increasing the value of made dunks would actually increase the incentive to finish your shot and thus avoid contact and avoid having to settle for just two points when you could get three or even four.

 

You would turn this into the all star game where people would stand and watch dunks because otherwise people would be fouling out left and right.

 

Here comes the And1 mixtape tour 

 

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

Dunking on someone isn't an example of an NBA player doing an amazing thing with their skill?

 

It certainly is by those that can currently do it regularly within the flow of the game. I don’t need every player always trying to dunk for extra points. The ball stopping in the post as everyone tries to figure out how to dunk would be a nightmare too which I was happy to get away from.   

 

1 hour ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

They have an extremely rare and breathtaking skill that puts butts in seats and eyes on TVs.  Well, let's reward them for it in the same way that the game rewards Steph Curry for his special skill.  Why is it that one rare and highly specialized skill should have outsized competitive value and not others?

 

Yes they do but the 3pt line already existed. The NBa isn’t rewarding Curry for his skill set. He developed his skill set around his own physical limitations and with what already existed in the NBA and turns out, he’s the best ever at it. Lebron and Russ can get to the basket literally any time they want. Their skills (that being one of many) are already showcased and “rewarded” in the NBA even if they don’t get an extra point for it. 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Momma There Goes That Man

[Renegade7]

4 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

McQueen is wild these days.

 

Hes on some different level.

 

 

On 3/20/2018 at 8:44 AM, TryTheBeal! said:

 

 

As usual, Steve is right.

 

 

Not anymore : )

 

 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Renegade7

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, Destino said:

It is "a skill" but being able to dribble, shoot, and pass is a "skilled" basketball player.  Embiid has a low post game, and uses it, but it's one skill of many.  That's the way it should be.  Low post offense is no longer granted a special status that allows centers to forgo learning all other basketball skills and still be superstars.  

 

Where is Steph Curry's above the rim game?  Where is his low post game?  He doesn't have them at all.  And yet he's a top three player in the NBA because the NBA game does not value those skills in a proportionate way to jump shooting.  You don't have to be a well rounded basketball player to dominate today's game, you just need to be a good shooter.

 

There is only one Joel Embiid in today's game, and I think that's a problem for the league.  And he is only a dominant offensive player because he can face up and dribble and shoot.  If he couldn't then he'd go from a 23 PPG guy to a 13 PPG guy.  The league changed the rules and made traditional big man scoring untenable.  It was a negative unintended consequence of trying to kill iso ball.

[Going Commando]

10 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

You would turn this into the all star game where people would stand and watch dunks because otherwise people would be fouling out left and right.

 

There would be a much stronger incentive to contest a dunker than there is now because you'd prevent three points or at worst, limit them to two free throws.  It'd make the game much more physical.

 

If your players are getting into foul trouble, then play a rotation.  Make rim protectors more valuable too and make inside play valuable for a change.

 

If you're still worried about them fouling out too much, then institute my other rule change where any time an offensive player jumps into a defender to initiate contact, it's a no call.  Let a set up defender level a guy who tries to go rack on them.  Put some stakes on the play.  Make the Shaq drop step dunk worthwhile again.