Rising Suns??? Hollinger ESPN

[stress]

utah what the !!!!!!

[FromWayDowntown]

I will say this about Hollinger's comment -- he certainly has a vested interest in Phoenix making a comeback in this series, given that his predictive models said before the series that the Suns would win and given that the accuracy of his predictive models are pretty much his bread-and-butter at this point.

If his model is correct, he's seen as more expert than others; if his model is proven to be shaky, his model-based opinions lose their carry a bit. It's easy to be right in mismatches; the validity of Hollinger's models is really a matter of how well it predicts closer matchups and this series would be among the closer matchups thus far in the playoffs. I have no doubt that somewhere, deep down inside, Hollinger is hoping for a Suns comeback -- if only to validate his model.

I'm not trying to suggest that Hollinger is actively rooting against the Spurs, but it stands to reason that he's looking for hope that he'll be proven right in the end.

[timvp]

Hollinger is the worst type of fake statistician. Making up fake stats is okay; he'll get some sheep to follow him. But now the rest of his existence revolves around him either mentioning his fake stats, making excuses for his fake stats or rooting for his fake stats to prove to be right.

He's getting worse and worse. I used to like him but now Hollinger has become so self-absorbed it's difficult to find any unbiased basketball opinion out of him.

[CubanMustGo]

Hollinger's model excludes emotion, heart, and experience - all things that factor much more heavily into the playoffs than the regular season. And he's too dumb to credit those factors, blindly saying "my numbers say x" no matter what.

[TampaDude]

a bunch of Hollinger. Spurs in 5. Book it.

[Allanon]

Then again, given that the Spurs are 163-33 (.832) at home since the start of the 2004-05 season (including playoffs) and 25-7 (.781) at home in playoff games during that time, it would seem possible that the Suns had their best chance to win a game in either Game 1 or 2 and missed it.

Ultimately, I don't think the chances of doing something in basketball aggregate over time. You're either better on a given night or you aren't, and that has very little to do with whether you've done something (such as winning in San Antonio) recently. I don't really think odds tend to "catch up" to good teams. Phoenix might win Game 5 -- , they might even win a Game 7 if it happens -- but it won't be because the odds are catching up to them. It will be because they play better than the Spurs do.

Yes I can see your point, it's from a basketball point of view. It's hard to predict anything when it comes to humans.

Statistically speaking, only from a numbers perspective, there is no way the Spurs should have been up 3-0 but they are up and it happened.

But looking at it from a 7 game series point of view, the Suns should have won at least 2 games in this series with 1 being in San Antonio. Spurs should have won one in Phoenix (which they have)

You're right in that they had their best chance in game 1 & 2 but it didn't happen. Since the 3-0 was a sort of statistical fluke, the Spurs should have won 4-0 at that point to complete the "statistical" fluke or "buck the trend". But they didn't so now the odds come back into play and we have a normal statistic again, Spurs are 3-1 (winning 2 at home and 1 on the road, just missing 1 more home win to complete the trend #7)

The best chance of the Suns winning now would be in Game 6 but since they can't get to a game 6 without wiinning Game 5, they get odds towards game #5 since that's also the missing SA game win. If the Suns win #5 (as they are statistically favored to), the whole series is exactly back on the statistical trend 3-2 with both teams winning the games they should have won.

Then you round out statistics with Game #6 Suns and Game #7 Spurs and the series went exactly as it should have (looking at it from a 7 game perspective)

Numbers generally tend to even up and the statistics are generally correct...given a large enough sample. The 7 games isn't a large enough sample but that's all we have right now.

[1Parker1]

John(NYC, NY): Your prediction for spurs/suns series was suns in 6. How do you justify that?

John Hollinger: (4:10 PM ET ) Is it really that complex? We should be 2-2 at this very moment. Obviously at 3-1 San Antonio will likely prevail, but I still say if you played this out 100 times it would go about 53-47 for Phoenix.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
braeden, san antonio: As a spurs fan, i'm somewhat worried about the suns coming back or at least sending the series to game 7. should i be?

John Hollinger: (4:10 PM ET ) Of course you should. These teams are basically even, so it wouldn't shock me at all if Phoenix climbed back in it.

From his chat today .

Why do people continue to make excuses for the Suns and downplay what the Spurs have done. News flash, ALMOST winning a game, and ACTUALLY winning a game are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!

[duncan228]

braeden, san antonio: As a spurs fan, i'm somewhat worried about the suns coming back or at least sending the series to game 7. should i be?

Is that ST's braeden0613?

[Kyle45]

Wait, so almost winning two games is as important as actually winning two games? My head might explode trying to read the Hollinger statistical theory behind that logic.

[FromWayDowntown]

From his chat today .

Why do people continue to make excuses for the Suns and downplay what the Spurs have done. News flash, ALMOST winning a game, and ACTUALLY winning a game are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!

I agree with you about the analysis, but I think we're all getting a bit sensitive to hearing/reading media-types who are suggesting that the Spurs are just lucky to be up 3-1 and that it's very likely that the series will wend its way to a Game 7. I think that possibility certainly exists, no matter the mental and tactical advantages that the Spurs might seem to have, and I don't think it's wrong for pundits to argue that there's reason to think that the Suns could even win the series.

I think there's plenty in the 6 quarters that immediately preceeded Game 4 to think that the Spurs are the superior team; but if I'm a Suns fan, I'm banking on the fact that my team has been able to build double-digit first half leads in 3 of the 4 games and that it might have found some answers in its resounding win in Game 4.

Was Game 4 just the Suns playing well and the Spurs playing poorly (probably) or was it something else?

[SPARKY]

Hollinger's just hoping his original prediction pans out.

[Cry Havoc]

You're right in that they had their best chance in game 1 & 2 but it didn't happen. Since the 3-0 was a sort of statistical fluke, the Spurs should have won 4-0 at that point to complete the "statistical" fluke or "buck the trend". But they didn't so now the odds come back into play and we have a normal statistic again, Spurs are 3-1 (winning 2 at home and 1 on the road, just missing 1 more home win to complete the trend #7)

The best chance of the Suns winning now would be in Game 6 but since they can't get to a game 6 without wiinning Game 5, they get odds towards game #5 since that's also the missing SA game win. If the Suns win #5 (as they are statistically favored to), the whole series is exactly back on the statistical trend 3-2 with both teams winning the games they should have won.

Then you round out statistics with Game #6 Suns and Game #7 Spurs and the series went exactly as it should have (looking at it from a 7 game perspective)

Numbers generally tend to even up and the statistics are generally correct...given a large enough sample. The 7 games isn't a large enough sample but that's all we have right now.

This is absolutely false. If you flip a coin 49 times and it lands heads 49 times in a row, the chance of the next flip landing tails is not any greater than it had been on the first 49 flips. It is exactly the same.

There is no statistical evidence to suggest that a "skewed" stat is going to renormalize itself. Statistics do not work in such a manner. Never have, never will.

[ClingingMars]

as SAS would say:

IT'S OVAH!

- Mars

[Pero]

4) But instead they discombobulated on themselves when the Spurs applied pressure

WTH does that mean?

[K-State Spur]

It's a remote possibility but the possibility is there nonetheless. I think it's ridiculous that a team down 0-3 could come back.

What worries me the most is:
1) The Suns have come back for 0-2 and 1-3 so we know they're resilient
2) They should have won Game 1 OR
2a) They should have won Game 2
4) But instead they discombobulated on themselves when the Spurs applied pressure

Odds say that the Suns are due to win a game in San Antonio in Game 5. And if they win in San Antonio, does that give them an automatic win in Phoenix in Game 6? They should have the odds to win in Phoenix being the home team and already losing 1 badly there.

That places Game #7 in the air, Phoenix would no longer have the odds to win in San Antonio.

So I would say series odds are now in favor of a 7 game series with San Antonio winning in game #7.

I think many would agree that the Suns should have managed to pull out game 1 (although they didn't exactly tank in that game, the Spurs made a lot of plays).

But after their tremendous start in Game 2, the Spurs thoroughly outclassed them for the remainder of the night.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

WTH does that mean?

They fell apart.

[Ariel]

No, not worried at all, for two main reasons. One, I think the chances that happens are slim to none, considering it'd mean losing the next three games in a row, two of which are in San Antonio including the potential deciding game. But more importantly, it means jack to me what round you're eliminated in, it's either a championship or not. And if the Spurs were to blow this lead then I'd take it as a strong indication they weren't going to make it past the next three rounds anyway, considering this might just be the toughest year in a while. In summary, if they're going to make it they can't blow this, and if they do -which they won't- then they weren't going to make it anyways. So no, not worried at all.

[Allanon]

This is absolutely false. If you flip a coin 49 times and it lands heads 49 times in a row, the chance of the next flip landing tails is not any greater than it had been on the first 49 flips. It is exactly the same.

There is no statistical evidence to suggest that a "skewed" stat is going to renormalize itself. Statistics do not work in such a manner. Never have, never will.

On a game by game basis, yes 50-50 would be accurate if you go by heads or tails but in trending the series, numbers tend to follow a pattern.

The skewed stat is 3-0 and that broke all the trends and should have gone 4-0 at that point if it follows the skewed pattern. But 3-1 is no longer an anomally, since it's on the verge of being changed in favor of the trend again aka 3-2:
1) Phoenix is supposed to win 1 of 4 games in SA
2) Suns should win 2 games out of 7 in the least

And if this happens, then the series would be 3-2 which again follows the overall 7 game series trend nicely and also suggests that Suns would win Game #6 as well.

We know trends aren't 100% correct but this series is falling back into the trend so it's not crazy to think the Suns have a good chance at winning #5 and also #6 depending on #5.

Let's see what Timmy, Tony and Manu have to say about the trends tomorrow

ps. Hahah Discombobulated, "to fall apart" or in the Suns case, they choked away the final minutes in Game 1 and the second half in Game 2. Spurs Defense had alot to do with it.

[Pero]

They fell apart.

Why such a strange and long word for something so simple?

[RonMexico]

I was in vegas all weekend and fell asleep at the Bellagio sportsbook watching the Suns-Spurs game on TV after being awake for approx. 36 hours of hard drinking... then I got kicked out... haha.

[sandman]

Yes I can see your point, it's from a basketball point of view. It's hard to predict anything when it comes to humans.

Statistically speaking, only from a numbers perspective, there is no way the Spurs should have been up 3-0 but they are up and it happened.

But looking at it from a 7 game series point of view, the Suns should have won at least 2 games in this series with 1 being in San Antonio. Spurs should have won one in Phoenix (which they have)

You're right in that they had their best chance in game 1 & 2 but it didn't happen. Since the 3-0 was a sort of statistical fluke, the Spurs should have won 4-0 at that point to complete the "statistical" fluke or "buck the trend". But they didn't so now the odds come back into play and we have a normal statistic again, Spurs are 3-1 (winning 2 at home and 1 on the road, just missing 1 more home win to complete the trend #7)

The best chance of the Suns winning now would be in Game 6 but since they can't get to a game 6 without wiinning Game 5, they get odds towards game #5 since that's also the missing SA game win. If the Suns win #5 (as they are statistically favored to), the whole series is exactly back on the statistical trend 3-2 with both teams winning the games they should have won.

Then you round out statistics with Game #6 Suns and Game #7 Spurs and the series went exactly as it should have (looking at it from a 7 game perspective)

Numbers generally tend to even up and the statistics are generally correct...given a large enough sample. The 7 games isn't a large enough sample but that's all we have right now.

Curious about this statistic and numbers perspective that you keep talking about when you say that the Suns have the odds for Game 5.

Weighted percentage of a Spurs home win this series is 72% based on Spurs home record and PHX road record.

This means, based on the odds, that the Spurs can reasonably expect to win three games before losing one game.

The first 4 games had the home team winning three times, a statistical reversal to the regular season where the road team won three times in four games.

How exactly do the odds favor the Suns?

What is this nebulous feeling of being "due"? Just because they missed their first "due" game in Game 1 does not mean that cosmic fate is going to present them with another "due" game.

[Allanon]

The odds are for a 7 game series.

Like you said, it's about 75% for a Spurs home win. 25% would be for a Suns win in San Antonio.

So 1 out of 4. The Suns have not won a game in San Antonio yet so they haven't gotten their statistical "due"...in a statistical 7 game series. It could be game #5 or game #7 of the remaining games. But since the Suns won't have another chance, it must be game #5 and by winning #5, they put themselves into good position to win #6. But at the same time they have a very low chance of winning #7.

Almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[ClingingMars]

I was in vegas all weekend and fell asleep at the Bellagio sportsbook watching the Suns-Spurs game on TV after being awake for approx. 36 hours of hard drinking... then I got kicked out... haha.

plan to do that again? seems to have worked.

- Mars

[sandman]

The odds are for a 7 game series.

Like you said, it's about 75% for a Spurs home win. 25% would be for a Suns win in San Antonio.

So 1 out of 4. The Suns have not won a game in San Antonio yet so they haven't filled their "due"...in a statistical 7 game series.

Nor have the Spurs filled their "due" of three home wins out of four. So statistically, at worst, both teams have a 50-50 chance of winning this game.

If I'm PHX, I don't like those odds.

[sandman]

The odds are for a 7 game series.

Like you said, it's about 75% for a Spurs home win. 25% would be for a Suns win in San Antonio.

So 1 out of 4. The Suns have not won a game in San Antonio yet so they haven't gotten their statistical "due"...in a statistical 7 game series. It could be game #5 or game #7 of the remaining games. But since the Suns won't have another chance, it must be game #5 and by winning #5, they put themselves into good position to win #6. But at the same time they have a very low chance of winning #7.

Almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Suns must win Game 5 to win Game 6.

Brilliant.

Is your name Hollinger?