I just stumbled onto this website. Not sure what their methodology is, but interesting none the less. Lets you put any of the teams left in the playoff head-to-head, and gives you probability of each winning in 4, 5, 6 or 7.
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/seri...6&team2_id=370
(original 65% odds to start the series)
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/playoffs-odds/
(Odds updated after every game, after game one, 75% AFTER GAME TWO, 87%)
.
It gives Oklahoma a 22% to win the championship, boston 5%, Miami about 22%, and gives us 49%.
Last edited by spursfaninla; 05-30-2012 at 12:42 PM.
Accuscore had Spurs 58% over OKC prior to game 1, and 71% now that the Spurs are up 1-0. They have SA as 61% over Miami and 73% over Boston if it comes to that. Of course, I have seen probabilities change against future opponents. Prior to the playoffs starting, Accuscore had the Spurs at 76% over the Clippers, but that changed to 85% and eventually 90% between rounds 1 and 2.
As I recall team winning game 1 , has 78% record of winning whole series
Means absolutely not a ing thing.
Of course, this is just counting up what has happened in similar situations in the past, and is not really predictive, but still interesting:
I heard than on a broadcast, but the following website gives better breakdowns:
http://www.whowins.com/tables/up10.html
In our particular situation (conference finals, game one win, at home) Series probability of win is 84% (64 wins, 12 losses). (I remember losing to Lakers with game one win).
Visitor who wins game 1 has a 70% to win the series ( 24-10). (I remember when we overcame those odds before).
Teams leading 2-0 in the semis with home court are 47-3 (again, we lost after winning 2 to the Lakers, but that was in quarters; there, the odds were even better that we should have won the series, but I digress).
So, if we win tomorrow, it become pretty unlikely we lose the series, barring injury.
Also interesting, the above website gives the odds of winning game 2 as only 65% (50-26).
Very strange that many game 2's are lost, yet obviously those series still often yield a win for the higher seed. Thus, game 2, as a predictor of series wins, is less important than a game 1 win.
.
teams are gonna start split-a-tiago
No they won't...because Pop will be so far up Tiago's ass to hit those free throws he won't miss them if they start doing that. That's why nobody does it.
Interesting.
Good to know someone else understands that.
Pop would also be smart enough not to play him once OKC hits 4 fouls in a quarter, unlike Vinnie Del Fuego. If they want to foul him before that, it only accelerates the time until Manu gets to the line with every foul.
I'm sure those websites are correct most of the time but as for me I put zero thought or faith in any of those odds or numbers.
The problem with that is if Tiago is sent to the bench it just means more Duncan/ Diaw.
I think game 1 was enough of a wakeup call for the Spurs. They should be ready by game 2. If they don't give the Thunder easy baskets I don't think the Thunder cans score enough to keep up.
Manu is the best at milking a team in the penalty. I think that's a huge advantage Splitter gives over Blair on his rolls is that if he doesn't make the shot he's going to draw the foul.
true. gotta love depth in this case.
fouls to give.
There's not a stat in the world that would have predicted that trading RJ for Jack and adding Diaw would be the keys to making this team so much better. And after we got them, most stats weren't predicting we'd do this well.
Then we started winning and winning, and the stats started predicting we'd keep winning. I imagine if we stop winning, they'll revise their predictions based on the fact that we lost. Because all stats no how to do is predict that the future will be like the past.
And yeah, if the future continues to be like the recent past, we're going to keep winning.
on the contrary, the entire board was a riverwalk parade after the rj trade happened.
i admit ive been surprised at how diaw how has been playing with enthusiasm. must be the french connection.
however, everyone knew jax would bring new life to the team. jax is here to win a championship, plain and simple.
Yes, but none of that was based on statistical analysis.
Statistically, neither Jackson nor Diaw were players that were going to do very much for this team -- on the contrary, they were castoffs because they weren't helping their old teams.
So while people who knew the players involved were excited, I seriously doubt that if you ran RJ for Jack through the ESPN Trade Machine it projected some huge advantage.
N/m
Sjax (6'8) and RJ (6'7) are about the same size, how did SJax increase the teams "length"? Depth, yes. Toughness, yes. Clutch-ness, yes.
Unless sjax has a great armspan I did not know about. Leonard is the one with length..
Not to take away from your point. There are plenty of "intangibles" that the numbers may not take into account.
now is too early for us to say it man
PS: when can I start thread?
bump
what say you, 90210?
I don't know about everyone else, but the idea of the Thunder going to Hack-a-Tiago did not require fortune-telling skills. Dude was shooting around 25% in the post-season if I remember correctly, before the 12 shots he got last night.
Still, good call.
What's the stat for starting 2-0 in a conference Finals with home court?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
