it seems right, flagrant are supposed to be uncommon

2 flagrant 2s. It makes sense.

4 points seems fair. The bigger question is if refs are going to actually call flagrant fouls when they happen

I assumed this was common knowledge after the Draymond debacle from 2016. The annoying part is that they can retroactively change what is or isn’t a flagrant after the fact so it really is just do they want you suspended or not.

It’s the only reason that Wemby foul on Brunson wasn’t upgraded to a flagrant 1.

4 is fine, but what counts needs to change. Intentional non-basketball plays are fine. A bad closeout tho being number 4 and getting you suspended is not right.

Does it matter when they pick and chose when to apply retroactive flagrants if someone is close to the limit anyway?

Has anyone except Draymond gotten to 4?

I still consider this a flop by Beasley: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIWzTBskqEk

This is a rule that sounds good, but the unintended consequences make it bad. If someone has 3 points already it’s much less likely they’re going to upgrade a foul to a flagrant.

The league didn’t want Wemby getting a flagrant for the reckless close out potential the rest of the series and risk getting suspended. They weighed all options when determining whether he deserved a flagrant from his actions in Game 3 with Brunson. Just too risky for the NBA to risk their golden boy closing out hard on a 3-point shot the rest of this series that ends up being a reckless close out and him having to miss a game.

It’s the perfect number because it keeps the playoffs from turning into 90s Bad Boys Pistons era, but still allows for hard postseason basketball. Plus, 2016 Draymond Green learned about this rule the hard way!

I don’t have a problem with that, the reason for it is obvious. That said, these aren’t flagrant 2’s, so I think 4 is pretty tight for 40mpg players who get deep into the postseason, especially when something like ‘wreckless closeouts’ are included, which can be a foul but accidental.

Did you not watch Draymond Green kick 4 balls and got suspended in the Finals? I think it’s more than enough

Well yeah, that’s why Wemby wasn’t given the obvious flagrant yesterday.

Its mostly fine.

A small change like letting a team appeal to league to reduce count from 3->2 if they make the finals would be ok. Especially since some flagrant 1s can be light.

Agree that its a rule that seems ok in theory, but ends up putting league and refs in some spots where they don’t enforce it.

Also its not totally fair since it doesn’t adjust for total minutes / games played and shallower rosters / etc.

I think 3 seems more fair tbh.

Like someone else said, flagrants aren’t all that common, maybe one called every 5 or so games usually. There’s been 26 flagrant fouls this postseason across 15 series, only one being a flagrant 2.

If we’re generous and say there’s 2 called per series (so let’s say 1 per series per team), a player would currently have to get a flagrant foul in each series before being suspended. If they manage to get a flagrant 2 (let’s say there’s 2 called out of our 30 total), they still have 2 more series they can happily commit another.

I can’t be bothered doing maths too deep on a comment that’ll be buried in a 6 hour old thread, but collecting 4 flagrant points is Draymond level dirty play and imo absolutely deserves suspension, but I think even 3 seperate events worthy of a flagrant foul should result in a suspension considering it’s a maximum of 28 games in a postseason, and commiting a flagrant foul in ³⁄₂₈ or 10% of your games is definitely cause for suspension.

Issue there is what many other people in the thread have said - consistency in calls. If everyone got called for a flagrant how Brunson did last game there’d be no one left to play

I mean. It’s tough to get four flagrant points in the playoffs. It’s very rarely ever happened (most notably Draymond)

I think it’s fine, but to see a star player get suspended over flagrant fouls in the post season, despite a nearly spotless record for 3 years, you have to think something else is going on. And it’s not that he’s targeted by officials looking to give flagrant fouls, it’s that they’re not doing their job in the first place and the player ends up taking action to defend themself.

I have a better rule. If you deliver an attempted death blow to an opponent’s trachea for no reason, automatic 10 game suspension

Honestly, 4 feels like the perfect sweet spot. It allows a bit of room for a single, accidental hard play or a heated moment, but heavily punishes anyone being consistently reckless when the stakes are this high. It keeps the game physical but safe.

It’s how Warriors lost that game 6 basically

deux

I take more issue that it resets and regular season doesnt count. I dont think it should. 4 pts probably only affects guys who go deep in the playoffs. If draymond for example is at the limit from the regular season and GS is an 8 seed, he shouldn’t get the slate wiped clean for a 1st rd match up where he maybe wants to send a message against the top seed.

I think one should simply not commit flagrant 2s, but as we’ve seen the rules stretch a bit for someone the NBA needs in the series.

Should be a single flagrant 2. If you are out there actually trying to harm people then why do you need a fucking warning. That has no place in sports.

It makes sense there’s a limit, but 4 feels like it still gives enough room before things get out of hand.

Honestly, 4 feels like the perfect sweet spot. It keeps the intensity high but forces players to stay disciplined when the stakes are this big.

4 points feels fair playoff intensity is high, but dangerous plays still need consequences

Makes sense why Wimpy didn’t get one.