Wrongs, Rights, and What's Left

There is absolutely no part of me that wants to give San Antonio credit for beating the Suns in the 2007 Western Conference Semifinals. Forget the "vicinity of the bench" debacle on the part of David Stern and Stu Jackson. Even if that never happened, I cannot say for certainty that the Suns would have won this series - not when the best defense is a favorable whistle.

I am not convinced that San Antonio is a great defensive team (or even a good one, for that matter). It's impossible for me to believe that when Tim Duncan can swipe Amare Stoudemire's or Kurt Thomas' or Leandro Barbosa's arm, and it shows up as a block in the box score. I don't buy that Bruce Bowen can pull on Steve Nash's off arm on a lay up attempt, or Bowen's constant grabbing at Nash's arms, hips, and legs qualifies as stifling defense. After all, there are rules that clearly state "[c]ontact initiated by the defensive player guarding a player with the ball is not legal. This contact includes, but is not limited to, forearm, hands, or body check" (Rule 12, Part B, Section Ib).

For the record, nowhere in the rules does it state that a foul must be called when a player "flops" or flails his arms with the intent of drawing a call, even if no foul, or simple "incidental contact" (Exception 5 of the above stated rule), occurs.

That's all just my interpretation of "bright line rules" as set forth by the NBA, though. Far be it from me to criticize someone else for a poor performance of a difficult job, but after watching six games of hacking, clawing, grabbing, slapping, kneeing, and hip checking, I wonder whether or not any officials outside of Joe DeRosa, Jack Nies, and Steve Javie have actually read the rule book. They were the only crew the entire series that bothered to call fouls and violations on the Spurs (except for Tony Parker's blatant double jump stop through the lane, of course).

If anyone wants more proof, just look at the game three foul shooting and violation disparity between the Suns and Spurs. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

The final numbers indicate that the Suns should have won this series. The Suns were outrebounded by a total of ten for the entire series. They had only two more turnovers than the Spurs. They made six more shots, but went to the foul line 14 fewer times. Game four was the only one in which the Spurs out-fouled the Suns, and the Suns went to the line significantly more times than the Spurs. (I mentioned before the game even started that it was a good, veteran crew, so don't accuse me of bias on that one.)

But here's the kicker. Take game four out of the equation, and the referee bias becomes painfully clear. The other five games saw the Spurs called for 107 fouls to the Suns' 106. Somehow, though, the Spurs wound up going to the free throw line 143 times compared to the Suns' 112 trips. I'll say that another way to get the point across.

THE SPURS SHOT THIRTY ONE MORE FREE THROWS IN THOSE FIVE GAMES DESPITE COMMITTING ONLY ONE MORE FOUL!!!

I use the word "committing" loosely, as I made the point earlier that the Spurs don't get called for a lot of fouls. Somehow, some way, the Suns fouls nearly always seemed to end up with the Spurs shooting free throws, while the Suns took the Spurs' fouls out of bounds. Consider this - all of the Spurs wins in this series were by a combined 23 points.

But none of it matters now, anyway, because the series is over...done...finished...dead.

The Suns did everything right, everything they could do to win this series. Phoenix outplayed San Antonio at both ends of the court, yet they were not rewarded for their efforts. All things being equal, I can easily see this as a Suns series win in five games, but my preseries prediction was six games. Had it not been for suspect officiating and a DUBIOUS ruling by the commissioner, one that he clearly lied about when defending his stance, the Spurs would be watching the rest of this series at Ultimate Electronics with the rest of the San Antonio faithful.

And what's left for the Suns and their fans? The same thing we have all had to endure the last two postseasons. A whole year of "what ifs".

What if the series had been called evenly?

What if David Stern had stood up for the integrity of the game (as Bud Selig so often claims he does) and meted out just punishment for Robert Horry's dirtiest of plays?

The Suns had it all this year. Defense, depth, health, and a commitment to winning, exemplified by Steve Nash's demonic approach to winning at all costs (except the cheap and dirty ways, of course). The Suns had the complete offense with Amare Stoudemire back in the middle, and they had the hunger and experience finally to topple Mount Duncan.

So why are WE the ones sitting at home left to ponder the future? Why are WE the ones suddenly looking forward to the draft lottery, hoping that Atlanta doesn't get lucky? Why are WE the ones forced to speculate about trading the most versatile defender the league has ever seen?

For such an amazing season to end the way it did, why are we the ones left to ask the big, difficult questions?

When you consider that we had the hopes and confidence finally to make it to the top, it is painful to sit here and ask the toughest question of all.

What's left for us?