I was intrigued by Sheed's conspiracy theory, so let's check out his claims.
Disclaimers and My Own Perspective
First, I want to show some love to Sheed. I absolutely loved that 2003-2004 Pistons team that took down the Lakers. It was a special team and I loved every minute of it. I harbor no ill will towards Sheed, as I have always respected the man's game. He used get a ton of technical fouls but there was something I found likable about the guy, in a way that doesn't quite stick with a player like Draymond Green, who I find insufferable.
I also want to recognize that when this podcast was made, it had almost been 19 years since this game was played. While Sheed was familiar with the box score and the situation.....anyone's memory about details from almost two decades ago can get a little fuzzy. I don't doubt it was frustrating to be in foul trouble in game seven of the NBA Finals. That really sucks and it "most likely" impacted the game (more on this possibility later).
The Pistons were facing Tim Duncan, one of the best power forwards in NBA history and it was a home game for the Spurs. Did that mean there was an unfair advantage? Possibly.
I am biased but it bothers me when I see the frequent downplaying of the Spurs dynasty. Of all the modern NBA dynasties, the Spurs were the longest-lasting and admittedly, the oddest and most nebulous of them all. The Spurs dynasty wasn't the most dominant or the most-talented and of course, they famously never repeated as champs. However, their resume from 1999 to 2017 featured five titles, six appearances in the finals, and ten conference finals appearances is impressive.
The team didn't benefit from playing in a big market and did not have an endless supply of free agents or stars dying to live in South Texas. The Spurs also didn't have MVP player in their prime decide to play for us after losing to us in a game seven either. What a LOSER. (in case you aren't getting the reference I am talking about KD joining the Warriors).
Okay, okay, so Jason Kidd, was an MVP candidate in 2002-2003 (but he did not win it) and he almost signed with the Spurs in 2004, after losing to the Spurs in the 2003 Finals.....and yet, he didn't. Geez, what a "sliding doors" moment for the Spurs. I am glad we didn't sign this domestic violence offender. Kidd would have likely could have netted us a three-peat, from 2003-2005 but we wouldn't have been able to re-sign Parker and likely not Manu later. So it is unlikely the Spurs get the 2007 title and even more unlikely the Spurs are contending in 2012-2014 either. Maybe I should write a 10,000-word blog on that moment......sigh....
My point is, people already shit on the Spurs for not being as good as those other teams, and, I don't like that. They shouldn't be criticized for not being as great as the 90s Bulls or the 2010s Warriors. They could only play who was in front of them with those particular league rules and trends. To this date, the Spurs are the only true modern small-market dynasty in pro sports history and that's pretty cool.
Although I doubt the claims of some vast conspiracy, I can see the possibility that the Spurs benefited from some calls in the 2005 Finals, so let's hear Sheed out.
Sheed's Claims (as seen in the podcast video above)
1. David Stern favored the Spurs because of the following evidence:
A) According to Sheed, in a pre-game seven interview, David Stern called the Spurs "his team of the United Nations". Which implied (to him) that "the fix is in".
B) According to Sheed, it was the first time in "his era", the NBA, "had a flag up for every dude that was from another country".
C) He claimed the Spurs had four Americans on their team and that the NBA never "had a flag up" again for every player.
2. Because David Stren favored the Spurs, the officiating crew was biased against the Pistons. At first, Wallace claimed Danny Crawford's "punk ass" was there (he officiated game six but not seven) but then the hosts correctly listed the refs in game seven were: Dick Bavetta, Joe Crawford, and Eddie F. Rush. The co-hosts claimed they were "company men" for the NBA.
3. Because the refs were biased against the Pistons, Antonio McDyess, Ben Wallace, and Rasheed struggled with foul trouble, while Duncan did not. The crew goes on to talk about the most egregious officiating in the NBA playoffs (i.e. the 2002 Lakers-Kings series) and this connection implies the foul trouble experienced by the Pistons in game seven, should somehow be compared to those games.
4. The Pistons were a small-market team that didn't have a lot of marketable stars and this was also why Stern favored the Spurs over the Pistons.
Stern's Supposed "International Bias"
Let's take on the supposed "international bias" aspect first.
I tried looking for a 2005 Finals interview with Stern but I only
found this interview between games 1-2, and Stern did not call the Spurs "his team of the United Nations". In this interview, Stern calls the Pistons, "one of the most underrated champions we've ever had" and "fun to watch".
There is no way to verify Wallace's claim about Stern calling the Spurs "his team of United Nations", and even if this term was used, it doesn't imply bias or favoritism any more than his bland compliments about the Pistons. More than likely, Stern was desperately trying to find an angle to promote a boring Spurs and Pistons Finals match-up. Remember this was still 2005 and it was novel for a title-contending team to have two non-American stars.
I don't think referees listen to televised interviews from the commissioner to figure out how best to call the series. Does Wallace think there was some direct communication to the crews from Stern to favor the Spurs? Both of these ideas are extremely unlikely.
As for having "the flags up for every dude", I have no idea what this is referencing. Again, whatever it was, its existence, (if true), proves nothing. That flag scenario presented by Rasheed didn't make much sense to me. Although it is quite funny when he blurts out, "You didn't see the Bulls put up no fucking flag for Toni Kukoc!"
Finally, his claim that the Spurs only had "three, no four Americans" is not remotely close to being true. The Spurs had 17 players on their roster during the 2004-2005 season and 11 were American. To be clear, I am counting Timmy as an American, as he identifies as a Virgin Islander and an American and played for the 2004 US Olympic team.
Furthermore, five of the top seven players who played significant minutes in the Finals were Americans. The player with the 8th most minutes of the Finals, Beno Udrih (a non-American), played a total of 46 minutes in the series and only played 1:11 in game five and no minutes in 6 & 7.
Rasheed may be conflating the 2005 Spurs team for the 2014 title team which had nine international players but it seems more likely he was just bullshitting and did zero research before the podcast began.
I don't think Sheed's "international bias" argument is plausible and his evidence for this claim is ridiculous.
That said, it doesn't mean the Pistons didn't get screwed by the referees, so we have to do some more digging.
An Overview of the Officiating of the Spurs-Pistons 2005 Finals
The Spurs committed 142 personal fouls in the series while the Pistons committed 149 fouls. On the other hand, the Spurs had a large FTA advantage shooting 159 FTA while the Pistons only shot 126 FTA. Here is the game-by-game breakdown.
Game | Spurs FTA | Pistons FTA |
Game 1 | 15 | 14 |
Game 2 | 34 | 16 |
Game 3 | 17 | 17 |
Game 4 | 24 | 23 |
Game 5 | 21 | 23 |
Game 6 | 26 | 19 |
Game 7 | 19 | 14 |
As you can see above, most games were almost even in FTA for both teams. The biggest outlier and the reason for the large advantage in FTA for the Spurs was the FTA in game two (a 20-point blowout by the Spurs). In game seven, the Pistons intentionally fouled the Spurs three times in the last minute to ballon the advantage of the FTA, from -1 to a +5 advantage for the Spurs.
As always, FTA should be just one data point and it should not be used as the only source of evidence for a possible officiating bias.
The podcast's criticism of the officiating crew for game seven being "company men" could be thrown at any NBA officiating team. The NBA has typically favored experienced refs the deeper in the playoffs you go and this was one of the most-experienced and respected crews you could find in 2005.
The idea that Joe Crawford, the ref who would later kick Duncan out of a game for laughing would do the Spurs any favors is quite funny. Most Spurs fans hated Joey Crawford, even before the infamous laughing incident. I looked up the refs' "stats" for 2004-2005 and nothing jumped out to me but feel free to peruse the stats on your own on at basketball reference.
So far, there isn't strong evidence to suggest the Spurs had a huge advantage with the officiating. Still, I want to be fair. The proof is in the pudding so let's take a closer look at the foul trouble experienced by Rasheed and the entire frontcourt of the Pistons during game seven.
Luckily, game seven is on YouTube. I will be examining each foul for Ben Wallace, McDyess and Rasheed Wallace and judging the foul calls on a BS scale, 0-5. Five is complete bullshit while a zero would be a good foul call.
I will attempt to measure both the foul itself as well as the timing of the foul, and the context of the game. Of course, this is very scientific, trust me.
Sheed's Personal Fouls in Game 7
First Foul - 4:38 left in 1st Quarter (10:45 on YouTube Video)
Wallace is called for his first foul on a post-up by Duncan. It's clearly a reach-in, I have linked to the video above and as you can see in the photo above, he reaches across Duncan's body to take a swipe at the ball.
To be fair, it is a quick swipe and it did not disrupt Duncan from his drive. Technically, I think the refs are on solid ground here, but from Wallace's point of view, it was a move that frequently a "no-call" when it does not affect the play. It feels slightly unfair if you're a Pistons fan.
BS Meter - 3.5/5
Second Foul - 6:18 in the 2nd Quarter (27:03 on YT video)
Sheed's second foul comes a little before the halfway mark in the 2nd Quarter, which means he has made it 3/4 of the first half not in foul trouble (hey, look, I'm just pointing it out).
This is an unintentional trip off a screen and roll. He sticks that leg out a little too long and Manu falls to the ground. It's an easy foul to call and it had to be called. There's no issue with this foul.
BS Meter - 0/5
Third Foul - 5:21 left in 2nd Quarter (29:33 on YT video)
Wallace's third foul comes barely over a minute after his second foul was called, and this one is a killer heading into the second half. Both players are jockeying for position in the post, with Rasheed fronting Duncan. Parker forces a pass over Sheed and while it's called a push, Wallace actually pushes Duncan's arm down, preventing Tim from catching the ball You can make out Wallace's hand on Duncan's bicep in the above photo but it is a bit grainy.
In a rough and tumble game seven, maybe it shouldn't have been called. That said, it is a foul and I don't think that's disputable. So far, with three fouls down, there are no ghost calls, nothing to the point at that could be defined as egregious. As this would be Wallace's third foul....and maybe it didn't have to be called I'll go with 2.5 on the BS Meter.
BS Meter - 2.5/5
4th Foul - 11:09 left in 3rd Quarter (45:32 on YT video)
This one is pure stupidity from Wallace, who shows a complete lack of awareness of his foul situation. Less than one minute into the second half and he hacks Manu across the arms. Yes, it prevents an easy lay-up, but at the expense of your fourth foul at the start of the third quarter of game seven of the NBA Finals? This is obviously a mental mistake and it's also clearly a foul.
BS Meter - 0/5
4th Foul with 1:02 left in 4th QuarterWith the Spurs clinging to a four-point lead with one minute to go, Wallace attempts to strip Duncan as he makes a strong move near the basket. Wallace hacks him across his arms. I am torn from a game theory aspect on if this is a good or bad foul. On one hand, Duncan shooting over a good defense near the basket is probably in the 55-60% success rate. Maybe fouling is a good idea as Ducan is not the best free throw shooter. On the other hand, this is your fifth foul and if you do force OT, or need to foul to get the Spurs to the line later, you would one personal foul from being fouled out. Duncan only makes 1 of 2 free throws, so it's not that bad of a trade-off, but that's not the point....it's clearly a foul, no matter how you slice it.
BS Meter - 0/5
Summary of Wallace's Fouls
Three of Wallace's fouls are clear fouls with little room to interpret them as otherwise. The two fouls in the second half are clear hacks, the other foul in the first half was a clear unintentional trip. The other two fouls might be deemed "questionable" by a Pistons fan or by Wallace but they are not controversial, they're plays you might see called a foul quite frequently.
You might chalk it up to the fact that Rasheed had a bad reputation and refs hated him. That idea might have some truth in it, but some of these fouls are mental errors. After all, this is the guy that left Horry WIDE open in game five.
Sheed mentioned that the other guys were in foul trouble as well. Let's check their fouls out, starting with Hall of Famer, Ben Wallace.
Ben Wallace's Personal Fouls in Game 7
1st Foul - 4:06 left in 1st Quarter - 12:41 on YT video
I tried screen capturing the foul but it was not re-played, so from the screenshot, it's hard to tell what's happening at all. If you are interested, I have the link above.
With 4:08 left in the quarter, the Pistons are inbounding the ball. Brent Barry steals the inbounds pass and slips the ball to Horry. Ben Wallace was making the move to get the ball but was too late, so he just ends up shoving Horry with his shoulder. It's a clear foul, as Horry was knocked over. It's not a bad foul as it could have been an easy two points in a fast break....but it's still a clear foul.
BS Meter 0/5
2nd Foul - 6:28 left in the 2nd Quarter - 36:35 on the YT video
Again, the screen grabs didn't work for this play. It's a reach-in on Wallace while Duncan was posting up. Tim still maintained possession of the ball. It is a reach-in but it didn't really need to be called. My guess is the refs are trying to set a tone for the game. I would be annoyed if I was Big Ben, so I'm going with a 2.5.
BS Meter 2.5/5
3rd Foul - 9:26 left in 3rd Quarter - 49:14 on YT video
Okay, it is a lot of effort to screen capture and I am getting lazy and tired.
Again, view the link if you are that insane. This is finally a call I think is pretty bad... Tim is attempting to "pin" Ben Wallace to gain position, right underneath the basket. Tim uses his arms to "find" Ben and prevent him from trying to front him. In an attempt to get around Tim, Big Ben kinda flops. Both players are mixing it up but I think this should have been a no-call or an offensive foul on Tim. I'm going full BS on this if I am a Pistons fan.
BS Meter 5/5
4th Foul - 2:19 left in 4th Quafter - 1:22:54 of YT Video
Ben gets caught in a switch on a pick-and-roll at the top of the key against Manu, one-on-one. This is not a good matchup, Manu makes his move and Ben reaches in. I don't think it had to be called but Manu was playing great in this game, so it's really a good foul as it's before his shot and it's one of those safe plays to make. If the refs don't call a foul, you might get a steal....if they do, it's still before the player has shot and he won't get free-throws. The announcers note that this was the Piston's FIRST foul of the fourth quarter. If there was a conspiracy against the Pistons why did the refs swallow their whistle for the first 10 minutes of the quarter?!? !
BS Meter 1/5
5th Foul - 16 seconds left in 4th
This is an intentional foul, to get the Spurs to the line, zero BS here.
Summary of Ben Wallace's Fouls
Like Rasheed's fouls, we have two obvious fouls and three more fouls that are "debatable". That said, I think Ben's third foul is the worst we have seen so far. I do not see any bias here so far.
I admit I am a glutton for punishment but I am NOT looking up Antonio McDyess' fouls. I am tired and this is my blog. Go look them up.
If there was no bias against the Wallace "brothers" I can't imagine some greater conspiracy against McDyess either. I've entertained Sheed's inane babbling with more than enough respect to now stop.
Rasheed Wallace was talking out of his ass and if he had guarded Horry in game five, maybe he wouldn't be complaining about some conspiracy against the Pistons in game seven. Maybe if the Pistons had shot better than 2-14 from three-point land in game seven, he wouldn't be on this podcast bitching about the past. Possibly if they had not gotten their ass kicked the first two games, maybe his podcast wouldn't have uncovered some stupid, brain-dead David Stern conspiracy.
In the history of the NBA, there have been some officiating travesties to be sure. This ain't one of them.
