Playoff Time (Finals version)

good question... i can't really imagine that, but i think it could be a blessing in disguise if it happened...

i guess the only scenario where that would make any sense is if Boston were winning by 20+ in the 4th quarter... the other part of that scenario is that Doc would have to be buying into conspiracy... that if Boston wins a game in LA, the refs will try to screw them one game back in Boston to make sure this series makes it back to LA... and the easiest way for the NBA to do that, if Boston steals a game, is to give Perk that 7th tech in games 2, 3, or 4...

but outside of that unlikely scenario, it's hard to see an opportunity to do something like that...

i could swear that situation has happened one time since they implemented this rule... maybe not in the Finals, though...

sorry if i didn't get a chance to read all responses yet... been dealing with some shit...

GR... mostly don't want to see Stern's hands on this series, but i know that is a pipe dream...

no disrespect, of course, but i don't agree with this statement... i do see where it seems that way, and even i am going to hate sweating out that stupid 40-0 stat if Boston loses game 1...

as long as Boston gets a split in LA, they are in great shape... and when i say great shape, i mean i will be spending my money by game 3...

IF Boston loses both games in LA, they can still very definitely go back to Boston and sweep that board... people who think they can't are sadly mistaken... and if Boston heads back to LA for game 6, up 3-2 (regardless of which 3 games they win), they are in good shape...

i would venture to guess that, out of those 40 series' in the NBA playoffs when Phil Jackson had a 1-0 lead to start the series... he had the better team in 40 of them...

EXACTLY !!   The thing to remember about that 40-0 stat is, most all teams that win game 1 go on to win the series, it's something like 73%.

Most coaches who've tasted alot of success in the postseason have very good records after winning game1.

The 40-0 is based  a bit on coinsidence. As with any stat there's always the 1 or 2 or 3 that get way overblown because of coinsidence.

When Phil lost a series he always lost game 1, that's just pure coinsidence on how it worked out. 

The Celtics only need a split in LA to be in excellent condition, doesn't make any difference if it's game 1 or 2.

I rarely look at or consider stats such as this, mostly coinsidence, and understanding stats that have powerful cause and effect  and stats that are more coinsidence based is the key to better capping.

no problem... i did like your write-up, and always appreciate well thought out feedback, even if it disagrees with me...

most insults don't bother me... but since you said you've been checking out threads and posts for awhile, i would have hoped you recognize by now that i do not consider a single person who works for ESPN to be an expert on handicapping... not one! 

i almost never watch ESPN OR TNT unless there is an actual sporting event on... all other ESPN shows are what you watch if you want to UNLEARN about sports...

talking logic and statistics around these parts will usually get you crickets... but i like it!

sorry i corrected your spelling on coincidence, but you fucking NAILED the exact word that describes that trend and most trends like that...

if Phil is 40-0 winning series after winning game 1, and the average coach is 73% after winning game 1, the only thing that matters is the disparity between the norm and what Phil has done... and yes, it would constitute a statistical significance, in this case... but, as theClaw so eloquently put it... you have to look at how that coincides with such things as:  1) having the better team... 2) having guys named Jordan, Shaq and Kobe... 3) was game 1 home or away... and who knows what else?

not discounting the stat... just saying, even though 40 out of 40 equals 100%... that stat does NOT equal 100%...

sorry... what i was trying to say (but didn't very well)... i don't consult ESPN for opinions on... anything, actually...

This guy is probably the mcsquare guy back with a different name.

i know...

Quote Originally Posted by xxx777:

We all want to be right. Let wait for GAME#1, then we can bad-mouth again & think about 2010 update! Enjoy the Game !....

History for 2008.....done!

History for 2010 is Coming!

Yesterday is history & tomorrow is a mystery, LoL! 

It's not a trend ! It's a fact : with 20 years experience ,10 NBA titles  as a coach and he earn his nick name as Zen Master !

If you think it a coincident &, or  trend then YOU ARE in DENIAL !

You believed ( as your analogy ) in this thread :

1) BOS is better ( team ) then LAK

2) Having guy name: KG ,PP,R Allen & Rondo

Let's see if Doc Rivers can do a coincident ! assume they win game 1 ( even I don't think so at this point )

coincidence: a striking occurrence of two or more events at one time

what theclaw was getting at, is that most trends are the result of a confluence of events or circumstances, which cannot be evaluated in isolation, independent of one another...

hopefully that clarified my earlier point...

Quote Originally Posted by Gold_Rush:

 

Should be a great series to watch without wagering but who wants to watch the finals and not have some kind of bet? NOT ME 

 

and Mars would be a great place to live without breathing... but i like to breathe... so i live on planet Earth...