After news broke that Draymond Green had been issued a flagrant foul and LeBron James a technical for their altercation late in Game 4 of the NBA Finals, many have started saying that this ruling is both unfair and biased to LeBron James.
Here is why I disagree with such an assertion.
First, I would like to say that this article is not concerned with what this means for the Finals and how this will help the Cavaliers. Nor is it a commentary on what the rules should be in terms of fouls for the league. I am merely stating, in the context of the rules that are currently in place for the NBA, how Draymond Green’s Flagrant 1 and subsequent suspension is fair.
I will preface my argument with a short description of what actually happened during the play.
It’s late in the fourth quarter; LeBron James and Draymond Green become tangled in a play as Green hits the ground. James steps over Green in what was deemed a display of disrespect by Green and he reacts accordingly by lashing out with a shot to the groin, rising to his feet and then subsequently flailing a jab that missed LeBron.
What ensued was a verbal altercation and very physical play on behalf of both players.
I would like to unpack this. There is no doubt in my mind that Green supposed groin shot to LeBron was completely unintentional but it deserved a flagrant. Green was flailing his arms in anger and I do not believe that Green was trying to hit LeBron in the groin.
The NBA considers a foul flagrant “when it involves excessive or violent contact that could injure the fouled player. A flagrant foul may be unintentional or purposeful.”
Anyway you look at this, Draymond Green’s original shot to the groin of LeBron was violent contact that could have injured him. Green lashed out at another man’s groin – there is no way that such an act could conceivably be anything other than violent.
Whether you think LeBron deserved the shot for walking over Green or not is irrelevant as the contact was violent and posed risk to LeBron; Green’s actions on this play could not be considered anything other than flagrant.
Many have assumed that Green is being suspended merely on the basis of this one play. That is simply not the case. Green’s foul count over the course of these playoffs has reached a point in which a one game suspension is mandated by the league.
His suspension is based upon his foul count throughout the entire playoffs and this foul is just one part of the overarching problem. To think that Green has been suspended just for this play is wrong.
In the first round of the playoffs, on the 21st of April, Green threw Houston’s Michael Beasley to the floor, the play wasn’t whistled at the time but on review, the league assessed the play to be worthy of a Flagrant 1 for Green. On the 22nd of May, during Game 3 of the Western Conference finals, Oklahoma City’s Steven Adams was kicked in the groin by Green’s flailing leg. Originally the play was ruled a Flagrant 1 but upon review by the league, it was upgraded to a Flagrant 2.
Leading into this foul then, Green had already amassed three points in the playoffs due to previous flagrant fouls. A fourth point automatically warrants a one-game suspension.
Warriors coach Steve Kerr had some thoughts on this points system, “I do think it’s curious that somebody who gets knocked out in the first round and who’s been on vacation for seven weeks is under the same penalty system as somebody who is still playing in The Finals now,” Kerr said.
“I’m not sure why that is the case. It seems like a strange rule. It’s not anything we’re going to bring up with the league. Maybe it’s something to talk about in the offseason. It does seem a little strange.”
Kerr’s point here seems like one that should be explored. I agree that this is a very curious matter, but with the rules that are currently in place, and the fact that Green was aware that he was one flagrant foul away from suspension, the punishment in this instance is fair.
LeBron deserved a technical for his actions; they were nonviolent but stepping over and enticing Green the way he did and his excessive rhetoric on the court definitely warranted a technical foul.
The difference is that LeBron did not lash out in a violent way that posed a risk of injury to Green, thus it cannot be deemed a Flagrant 1 as Green’s foul was.
The ruling was harsh on Green, but his fouls have accumulated and he has finally paid the price. One could argue that I am merely being biased to LeBron, but all I have done is outline the rules of the league in terms of fouling and applied it to this play.
A Flagrant 1 for Green is the right call. His suspension is just a consequence of this call and a result of him fouling throughout the playoffs.
pete bloor
Guest
Well he's at least confirmed one thing - he's a joke. I think my dog has a better understanding of the NBA and he died last year
OJP
Guest
thanks for your 3rd party input Pete, I gave up when Marshall asserted it was semantics to point out '1' wasnt 'multiple' .... I didnt think debating the meaning of 'semantics' was going to do me any favours! Marshall - if you read this, re introducing the 'facts / stats' into the discussion, I tend to hang out mostly on the rugby threads on this site; where, if you dont agree with a claim or assertion made by another poster (say for example, 'Joe gave away 3 penalties in todays game') its expected that you will explain why and if possible, provide some evidence to back up your point of view. Otherwise, things tend to degenerate into 'he said / he said' arguments where blokes end up calling each other 'peanuts'. Referring to specifics also allows someone else to have a closer look at what you are talking about because we all see what we want to sometimes... I said I didnt think the stats backed up your assertion initially, but after your next post mentioned that Draymond had blocked LeBron multiple times, I thought you could be right (and me wrong) so I went and had another look... of course blocks alone are a poor indication of someone's overall contribution to a defence, but it was the one specific you gave which I could easily have a look at, so I did.... I did think this line was genuinely funny though 'Enjoy your facade of impartiality' and well, I was either going to be labelled a 'LeBron Lover' or a 'MoneyGreen Hater' ... I'm actually neither, I respect them both but my only current NBA love is Z-Bo. Anyway, bring on game 7... that asterik might still be needed!
Jerry
Guest
Le Bron's just countered Thompson's 'hurt feelings' sledge pretty well last couple of games then!
pete bloor
Guest
It’s hardly a straw man as you then say anything that isn't absolutely egregious should be fine. (using SOO as an example wasn’t helpful to your case...). So we now get to the semantics of how far away is impunity vs egregious from a guy who got all offended when it was pointed out he was making up stuff to support his case. But it’s also worth noting that the direction of the league was applied in coming up with the rule. It is simple logic that in designing it just for the playoffs, as Kerr points out, that suspensions are more probable at the back end. It’s also worth noting he’s been the benefit of discretion by getting the proverbial “no call” in all three instances. Saying he’s been hard done by takes a lot of squinting at the fact pattern. The rule was specifically designed to stop repeat offending and green is a repeat offender, if he stopped hitting people in the nuts he’d have played. He’s a great player and the Warriors will more than likely still win out, but he’s a dirty palyer that I’ve got zero sympathy . Don’t commit a flagrant foul one in every 7 games and you don’t get suspended.
pete bloor
Guest
The points system is hardly arbitrary given a review process and a considered approach to its implementation and rational given as to why it is implemented. Also how "casual" a fan do you need to not think a guy who is All star, second team All NBA, first team defence, top 10 MVP vote getter, Defensive MVP candidate and subject of probably hundreds of articles along the theme "is draymond green the most important warrior? A fan that casual must have thought Pittsburgh were playing San Jose for the NBA crown
Marshall
Guest
We have now descended to semantics. My sincere apologies, I will in future review play by play sportview data before making a comment on a casual sports blog website. Point stands, he's a dominant defensive player and his presence in the paint impacts LeBron tremendously. Enjoy your facade of impartiality, LeBron lover.
Marshall
Guest
Nice straw man! Never suggested impunity, simply more discretion given the context of the match - it's the finals. Just as before a Grand Final or a State of Origin players get off all kinds of charges, and everyone is pretty much OK with this as it means we have the best players playing on the biggest stage. There is too much at stake for the game to be affected significantly by a suspension for something that wasn't absolutely eggregious.
josh
Roar Rookie
If you know a players has a short fuse, is on the line with regard for a suspension. Would you not try to engage in sufficiently hostile behaviour to elicit an outcome that favours your team? If it is a big boy's league then Draymond Green should grow up and fall for such obvious bait. What's the best way to counter a sledge; win.
Swampy
Guest
As I said Green walks the line and gsw accept that.
OJP
Guest
I bothered to look up Green's other blocks for the series as per NBA.com. Game 1 - 1 block against Tristan Thompson Q1, 2.58 Game 2 - didnt record a block (didnt really need to) Game 3 - 1 block against Kyrie Irving, Q2, 7.03. Game 4- see above Great player; hasnt blocked LeBron multiple times this finals :)
OJP
Guest
'Tarnishes the spectacle to have a teams most infuential player benched because of an arbitrary build up of points.' So by that logic, the best players can just behave with impunity ? Re the asterisk; if Cleveland actually manage to pull it off (still massively unlikely despite today) no one other than GSW fans will remember Green being suspended in game 4; what they will remember is that the Cavs rallied back from 3-1 down to win. Now, differences of opinion aside, enjoy Game 6 (and if necessary, game 7) Marshall! cheers OJP
OJP
Guest
Hi Marshall, I accept we dont see this the same way. In the footage available on nba.com, you can see Green come over to set a screen on LeBron at the top of the key. There is some tussling as Green tries to make sure Lebron cant get around the screen easily; no problem so far. LeBron pushes Green away (could have been a foul) Green keeps his feet, boounces back across and shoulder blocks Lebron; (again, could have been a foul but could hardly call one for that having let the first push go). Then LeBron throws Green off / to the ground with his left arm... this should have been called a foul (IMO) but wasnt. LeBron then goes to step over Green; who in attempting to get up, manages to hit LeBron in the nuts. Its after his nuts have been tapped and both guys are on their feet again that the jawing starts. Re Green dominating the paint against LeBron and 'blocking him multiple times' as you claim; are we talking about just game 4 or the whole series ? the NBA's game stats for game 4 (available via NBA.com) record Green's 3 blocks 4 as being against Irving (Q1, 10.08) Frye (Q2 9.41) and yes, James (Q4, 5.33). I havent bothered to look up the stats for the first 3 games. Green is an excellent player; but he deserved his suspension and was probably lucky not to have been suspended for kicking Adams in the nuts in the previous round.
Marshall
Guest
OJP, Please, LeBron initiated the confrontation throwing Green to the ground and then stepping over him, and then jawing off to elicit more confrontation. The game was over at this point, it was a clear attempt to achieve this result. Green had been physically dominating the paint, LeBron had been passing up layups with wild passes, and was blocked by Green on multiple occassions. We saw tonight the diffence it makes to their defense without him (let's not forget he almost pipped Kawhi for DPOY) Let's not forget LeBron got a tech, but also had another play where Curry was thrown to the ground on an inbounds play without the ball even being in play (by LeBron) which certainly could have been upgraded to a flagrant as not a basketball play (the definition) - yet it seems not all plays are reviewed.
Marshall
Guest
Only need to look at NRL or AFL where players are often given more leniency to play in a Grand Final because we want to see the best out there! Tarnishes the spectacle to have a teams most infuential player benched because of an arbitrary build up of points. Great for the NBA, great for LeBron, great for the casual fan who doesn't understand how important Draymond is to this team. He is probably more integral than Curry with Steph's recent form. Big time asterisk next to this finals win for the Cavs if they pull it off.
Swampy
Guest
Walk the line and sometimes you over step it. Nothing to see there. Should have been assessed that way on the night. Was clear to see how much value Green has to the Warriors today. The small ball lineups were relatively awful for GSW. A Game 6 or even Game 7 must bring immense extra revenue to the NBA I'd imagine. Adam Silver, nor David Stern before him, can make players shoot well or play well but there are other things that can be done to maximise revenue opportunities. Draymond took the revenue rope, tied the noose himself then put it around his own neck - wasn't much else Silver had to do...
OJP
Guest
Hi Marsall, you could be right about the NBA finding a way not to suspend at 2-2, and whilst i acknwledge your opinion, I cant agree that LeBron had to try and bait a suspension from Green... what made you come to that conclusion... becasue he stepped over Green ? Nor do I agree that Green dominated LeBron in the paint; I watched the game and didnt think that was the case and nor do the stats bear it out.... Green is an excellent player and deserved all star, but I he treads the fine line between playing hard and playing dirty (eg kicking Adams in the nuts) and as such, there are going to be times he has to sit out. Just in case you were wondering, I dont follow the Cavs and LeBron isnt my fave player. I've followed the Rockets since the 80's and am deeply saddened by the hiring of Mke D. cheers OJP
OJP
Guest
absolutely correct Jerry; how Green avoided suspension there was baffling... must have been to the 'CP3 school of clocking other blokes in the jatz crackers and getting away with it'
OJP
Guest
Hi Oliver, I agree with your comments; Green should have been suspended and correclty, was.
Marshall
Guest
Bottom line is if it was 2-2 they would have found a way to not suspend Green as it would be too much of an obvious weighting on the series. At 3-1 it's an easy call to make, they can still look like they are being tough on discipline and punishing him, while feeling even if the warriors cop a loss he can come back and they can still win the series. Pretty sad from LeBron that he had to try and bait a suspension out of the oppositions most influential player because he felt like they didn't have a chance otherwise... Warriors flat out out-played them in Game 4 and Green was IMMENSE, dominated LeBron in the paint. For the first time, LeBron was not the Alpha Dog in a basketball game. Fan of neither team btw, just dissapointed we will have a game without the best players on the floor in the pinnacle of the finals. Game 4 was an absolute ripper to watch.
Jerry
Guest
Green lost all rights to complain when he didn't get suspended for a flagrant 2 on Adams. Every other example of a flagrant 2 nut shot has copped a suspension.