It was a Portland Timekeeper it happens dude. If it was in Houston it would of started .1 faster. Doesn't change the fact that it was a horrible defensive possession.
I think if he shot the ball over 0.9 sec, someone would have conclusively stated that by now (ESPN, TNT, Rockets, anyone that want to analyze the video frame by frame with time). Just from watching the above video, he seems to shot it in 0.7 sec.
I just wish they would've replayed the possession like they did to us earlier in the game with .3 left (which inexplicably became .2) when they started the clock too early. But seriously...we can't keep dwelling. It is over. Motivation and experience is the only thing we have to gain from this.
you must be effing blind if you think it left his hands with .3. That frame by frame video where the Rockets fans are b****ing about the clock and saying "Houston won the game" shows it's out of his hands at .5. At any rate, the Lillard shot has been timed again and from the second his fingers touched the ball to the second he let it go the time has been anywhere from .67-.71 seconds. He got it off in under .9 seconds anyway you slice it. Get over it and move on with your lives. Rockets lost.
It definitely started late, but he very clearly has the ball out with 0.5 on the clock. See 1:21-1:23 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OuhXX-rtQTI#t=83 You are blind and crazy if you think it was still in his hands at 0.4 or 0.3 and that it wasn't out in 0.9 seconds, no matter when the clock started.
Even though this guy is a D-bag, it did look like he got it off in time. Now all you blazer fans, GTFO and go watch the second round.
How does the shot clock work? (Rounding to tenths) I'm sure we all know why I am even asking this, but to restate the relevance, sometimes long tenths matter in clutch situations. Without further ado, this is the question: Does the clock: 1. Round up/down conventionally? (950 ms -> "1.0", 949 ms -> "0.9") 2. Round down? (999 ms -> "0.9") 3. Round up? (801 ms -> "0.9") We ask this question because the same time, "0.9", can have different values according to the display algorithm, ranging from 0.999 seconds (basically 10 seconds) to 0.801 seconds (basically 8 seconds). This can have a potential swing (if the rounding is tampered with) of up to 0.198 seconds + reaction time (far longer than 2/10 of a second, which definitely matters)! Does anyone know? If not, let's discuss. tl;dr I WANT THE SHOT CLOCK TO SHOW THOUSANDTHS LIKE THEY DO IN RACING.
We're just embarrassing ourselves now. Lillard clearly shot that under .9 seconds. Using this clip posted by Mr. Dominant: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=650503328336871 In the video, he catches the ball at .02 and the ball leaves his hands at 1.00. So, from the time he catches and shoots takes about 58 seconds in the slow-mo clip. Once the clock finally does start, taking from .8 seconds to .7 seconds, the video counts from .30 to .41 which is 11 seconds of the video. So, .1 seconds of shot clock = 11 seconds of clip. If it took 99 seconds of the slow-mo clip for him to catch and shoot then we'd have something, but instead we have 58 / 11 = 5.27 seconds
The clock did start late. I have a hard time imagining him catching the ball, rotating and shooting in 0.9 seconds. It doesn't matter. Game's over, series is over. I hope that the Rockets players aren't dwelling on what could have or should have been, but instead using this motivation to be even better next year.
Clock started late, but he clearly got it off under .9 seconds. Even if they went back and looked at it they would confirm that he got it off under .9 seconds.
Fine, not as accurate. In 2014, we have more than enough in terms of sensor and video tech to make it accurate if we want it to be.
How am I a d-bag for pointing out that it is clear? The one guy wrote a conspiracy filled diatribe that couldn't be more wrong. And no Blazers fans are on here talking about it. There are just rational, sane Rockets fans that are calling out conspiracy theorist Rockets fans that can't come to grips with the loss. Are you part of them? Except it has been shown he did. We lost. It sucks.
I don't get it. 0.9XXXXXXX any amount of numbers is 0.9 0.8999999999999999999 is 0.8 0.9000000000000 is 0.9
That's rounding down. We're asking if the NBA shot clock rounds to the nearest tenth or does what you just described, because it makes a difference for sure.
I can't state definitively if the shot still would have counted, but there is absolutely no question the timekeeper screwed up. They reset the shot clock and reran a play earlier in the game in similar circumstances at the end of the quarter. They blew it by not taking a much closer look at this one.
