ESPN’s Brian Windhorst on the Questionable Officiating in Spurs-Knicks NBA Finals Game 3

The number that set off the fan base was 24 to eight. That was the second-half free-throw count in Game 3, and Brian Windhorst heard about it everywhere he went.

"That's infuriated the fans," Windhorst said, recounting what he heard in the concourse and in postgame reaction. But his read on the officiating was more complicated than the raw disparity suggested.

Start with the physicality. This series, Windhorst said, has been played at a very high level of contact, and Game 3 was no exception. The replays everyone was about to see showed Victor Wembanyama shoving Jalen Brunson down on an obvious non-call that borderline could have been reviewed for a flagrant. But ten feet away, Windhorst pointed out, Karl-Anthony Towns was getting manhandled by Keldon Johnson. The aggression ran both ways, and the referees were largely letting it go.

That was the setup. The turn came when the officials suddenly started calling the game tight, and the Knicks felt it more than the Spurs. Windhorst noted that the total foul difference in the game was only two. The second half was a bit wider at 15 to 10, but the Knicks also fouled intentionally late to put the Spurs on the line. Because those fouls came in quick bunches, the Spurs got into the bonus very quickly, which inflated the free-throw gap.

Even Mike Breen, Windhorst recalled, said on the broadcast at one point that the referees might have to start calling more fouls.

Then Windhorst got to the strategic part. The NBA, he said, will tell you it reviews every game through the same standard process regardless of complaints. But history says officiating can occasionally be impacted by public pressure, which is why he believes Mike Brown made his complaint at all.

The tell, for Windhorst, was the locker room. Based on the players he talked to and the quotes that came out, the Knicks players were not complaining about the officiating. Mike Brown was, and Windhorst thinks he did it for a political reason heading into a pivotal Game 4.

"Maybe it works, Rich, or maybe it doesn't," Windhorst said. Historically, there have been times when it has. He called it a strategic decision, and possibly a smart one.