Reply With Quote
3
Game 1
Game 2
Game 3
Game 4
I'm only asking about Games 1-4, since they occur in every single playoff series, and also because Games 5-7 often imply elimination games.
Game 1 = get the series off to a good start.
Game 2 = grab a 2-0 lead, or, equalize the series at 1-1.
Game 3 = get a commanding 3-0 lead, 2-1 lead, or prevent yourself from falling into an 0-3 hole.
Game 4 = win the series, get a commanding 3-1 lead, or prevent yourself from falling into a 1-3 hole or being swept.
3
lmao you can't answer this question in general like that, you need to have context. It's always good to start on a win but for the other options, games 2,3, and 4, they all depend on how the previous games went and there are numerous ways for each of those games.
The next one.Which game is the most important one in a series?
Game 3 is most important?
So what you're saying is, if the Spurs lost games 1 and 2 but won game 3, you'd be less disappointed than if the Spurs won games 1 and 2 and lost game 3?
This poll is nonsensical, tbh. Every game is important, but game 4 if you're up 3-0 is probably the least important.
I've always said the even games are the most important, because if you've played an odd number of games, one team is ahead. The team that's ahead can go ahead by 2 games or close out the series completely. The team that's behind can tie it up in most cases. So it's a huge pivotal game.
1-0 becomes 1-1 or 2-0 -- hugely different outcomes... teams up 2-0 win about 85% of the time
2-1 becomes 2-2 or 3-1 -- vastly different outcomes -- teams up 3-1 lose very rarely
3-2 becomes series over, or 3-3 going to game 7 -- no difference greater than that
which game is the most important? its the same answer for every series: the next game
Gregg Popovich: "The final one."
Looks like I'm the only person to vote for game two. I did so because if you get a 2-0 lead, you've put yourself in a strong position for the series, but at 1-1 (and with the consequent away win), you know you're likely in for perhaps a more extensive series.
Again though, it's all about context. For Spurs/Clippers, the crucial encounter is game three; for Pacers/Heat, it's game four. That's why I chose game two, as out of context, it's often a good marker for the series ahead.
The first game is probably the least important. The Spurs have overcome quite a few 0-1 deficits, and an 0-1 deficit is always easier to overcome than a 1-2 or 2-3 one.
Out of those 4, id say game 2.
The winner of that one takes some momentum with them when they change venues.
No. If you win game 3, regardless who wins the series, you are the better team.
Supposedly closeout games are the easiest.
Game 7.
WTF? Automatically?
Well, that's interesting. I suppose that in 2005, the Seattle SuperSonics, who were eliminated in the 2nd round of the playoffs by the San Antonio Spurs, were better than the 2005 NBA Champion Spurs (because Seattle won game 3), who went on to beat the Suns in 5 games and then beat a very tough-minded and balanced Detroit Pistons team.
If the series is tied 1-1, game 3 is not that critical, game 4 becomes more critical. The winner of game 3 gets a 1 game advantage, while in game 4 when it's 2-1, there are bigger implications because the difference in outcomes results in either a tied series or one team stuck in a 3-1 hole. However, if the series is 2-0, then yes, game 3 is critical.
This is my point, this poll is stupid because the options depend on the previous games of the series.
There's no point in having set rules or cliches about sports, or similar situations like which games are most critical in a 7-game NBA playoff series. It isn't sensible to think of sports in such a structured/modeled way like this because there are so many variables involved, for both teams. . There is no such thing as an identical series. Every situation is different. John Hollinger is another example of this. A power ranking based purely on statistics usually will not have the strongest teams ranked most accurately because the statistics from which the model draws on are all influenced by many factors that are unaccounted for, such as strength of opponent, injuries, match-ups, how the players are feeling at the time (I'm talking many things, like health, motivation, focus, etc.), refereeing (although you would hope this one balances out in the long run), etc. Hollinger's power ranking tells you which teams are hot by measuring things like point differentials, but they don't tell you which team is likely to win in a 7-game series, for example.
Gotta go with game 1. Go ask the Memphis Grizzlies how important game 1 was for them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
