Reply With Quote
Hollinger thinks city planners are responsible for interstate highways?
Sorry, what? If the home team wins 4, it's over. Or is there some change in rules?
Hollinger thinks city planners are responsible for interstate highways?
You are misunderstanding the concept of home team - home team, in this case, is not the team with home court advantage. In this case, it's the team that is playing at home.Sorry, what? If the home team wins 4, it's over. Or is there some change in rules?
For example - the games that have recently been played. Spurs were the home team for the last two, yeah? So the home team has won in all four of the games played.
If the team with HCA wins - then it's a sweep, as you say.
Ok, I still don't get it.
He says, "won the first four games".. Any team winning four games, wins the series. Home or not doesn't even matter. I just don't get the point here.
The team with the home court won the first four games in this series.Ok, I still don't get it.
He says, "won the first four games".. Any team winning four games, wins the series. Home or not doesn't even matter. I just don't get the point here.
The team with home court won game 1? Check, Hornets won.
The team with home court won game 2? Check, Hornets won.
The team with home court won game 3? Check, Spurs won.
The team with home court won game 4? Check, Spurs won.
The team with home court won the first four games.
Oooooooooohhhhhhhhh..... I get it now.
Thanks.
He's talking about "home team" in two different respects.Ok, I still don't get it.
He says, "won the first four games".. Any team winning four games, wins the series. Home or not doesn't even matter. I just don't get the point here.
1. the team with home court advantage is the home team for purposes of the series.
2. in each game, the team playing at home is the home team for purposes of that game.
When he says "the home team won the first four games," he's talking about a split in which neither team won a road game -- a series that was 2-0 for the team with HCA and then was tied at 2-2 after 4 games.
When he talks about the "home team" having a statistical advantage in the series, he's talking only about the team that has home court advantage.
I agree that it's extremely awkward.
As always, statistical analysis remains misunderstood.If percentage can tell everything
Show me a statistician who says "Numbers will tell you everything". If you do, you won't find one who's worth a . What you'll find is another ignorant person - only instead of the typical sportswriter who is ignorant of statistical analysis, you'll find a person who ignores everything else.
I don't know what harm it does to look at everything - the stats, the styles, the IR, the coaches, the trends, the momentum - but someone mentions the stats and everyone goes ape .
The team with home court won game 1? Check, Duncan Sick/Hornets won.
The team with home court won game 2? Check, Duncan Sick/Hornets won.
The team with home court won game 3? Check, Duncan Healthy/Spurs won.
The team with home court won game 4? Check, Duncan Healthy/Spurs won.
Do these NO fans know that this core group of players has won a million games on the road in the playoffs en route to championships?? We are 1-3 on the road right now but 2 of those came when Duncan was sick and the other one we laid down and let the Suns rape us in game 4. We played great in game 3 against the Suns that is for sure. Hornets being home guarantees them nothing.
This guy totally makes sense.
I was sold on him when he said Jackie Butler was the 3rd best center in the league based up his production per 48 minutes.
The guy's a genius I tell ya. A genius!!
It's hard to win a playoff road game, and unlike the Hornets (at least at this point), the Spurs do have to win one of those pesky road games if they are to survive. I think that anyone who thinks a road win (much less a win in Game 5) is a foregone conclusion is delusional. That's true, I think, because I'm relatively confident that the Hornets will make a much better showing in Game 5 than they did in either Game 3 or Game 4 -- and I thought they played pretty damned well for most of Game 3.
With that said, since 1998 there is one (1) NBA franchise that has a winning road record in playoff games: the San Antonio Spurs. The Spurs were 8 over .500 on the road during that stretch (39-31) entering the 2008 Playoffs and are now 6 over .500 (40-34) heading into Game 5. That's a pretty remarkable .541 road winning percentage in almost 75 road games against the toughest teams in the association.
The Spurs losses in Games 1 and 2 weren't just about Duncan being ill or the Spurs handing over games -- the Hornets played legitimately well (they shot nearly 50% in both games -- always a bad sign for the Spurs) and won those games legitimately. The burden is certainly on the Spurs to capitalize on their momentum and get a back-breaking Game 5 win. They can do it; if statistics are proof, then history says they're the most likely team in the league to get a big playoff road win at some point in this round.
Believe.
1.
For me this series is a lock to go 7 games if they lose tonight, no way do i see the Spurs mentally giving up when they are coming back to their Gym trying to close them out. I think with 2 chances to get a game in NO we will get it done.
If you look at his actual basketball 'analysis', then it becomes obvious why Hollinger clings so hard to the numbers.
, in his chat today he talked about how D'Antoni can use Randolph the same way he used Amare. Since they are such similar players and all... (well, they both put forth the same level of effort on defense)
Anything coming from New Orleans..you know it would favor the Hornets.
They are desperate for something to happen to them since the Katrina disaster.
Unfortunately for them they wont have their way with the Spurs.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.... the samples are biased. They weren't of a team that had Tim Duncan on them. Why should i trust this?
I couldn't care less about his stats, they mean nothing I want to know what the stats are for defending champs who tie up a series against an inexperienced team. Tell me those stats.
Hollinger's prediction in the Spurs-Suns series proved prescient.
You can bet that some of the team matchups where the home team held serve for the first 4 games matched up the #1 & #8 or #2 & #7.
I think we're still in a hole--home court advantage means a lot, especially to a young team--but we're a good road team in the playoffs. We've proved that over the years, and those stats don't lie either.
He obviously hasn't added in the calculation that should be applied when a coach wakes up, pulls his head on his ass, and has Bowen go rip Peja's balls off like Bowen has done.
N.O. Hornets have had 0% success of getting out of the 2nd round so suck that hollinger!!1111eleven111!
His belief that D'Antoni is a "great" coach is interesting to me too. It's as if Hollinger and so many others in the media completely forgot D'Antoni's 14-36 with the Nuggets in 1999 or his 21-40 in his interim stint in Phoenix in 03-04. That's not to say that D'Antoni can't coach -- he obviously can. But his record in seasons without Steve Nash isn't stellar and it would give me pause about concluding that he'll be a great fit for New York.
Right. In my mind this series is eerily similar to the '04 Spurs-Lakers series. The Spurs torched the Lakers twice at home to start the series and then the Lakers made a key defensive adjustment which enabled them to win games 3 and 4.
It still took a miraculous finish for them to win Game 5.
Then again, the Lakers had control of almost all of Game 5 until Pop shortened his bench, the Spurs nutted up, and rallied themselves back into the game to put the Lakers in position to come up with a miracle.
That was truly a battle of pedigreed heavyweights.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
