Reply With Quote
These stats are completely useless because the applicability of these stats in predicting future outcomes are based on assumptions that aren't fulfilled.
The Spurs have won 29 opening games in playoff series since Tim Duncan's arrival. Of those 29 series with game 1 victories they've gone on to win the series a total of 25 times (86%). However, their record in games 2s after a game 1 win is only 20-9, so based on that 86% series winning percentage it would appear that the Spurs let off the gas a bit in game 2 winning only 69% of those games.
If the Spurs go up 2-0, they own a 18-2 record in those series in the Duncan era (90%).
Last edited by Ed Helicopter Jones; 05-07-2014 at 06:04 PM. Reason: Lakers suck
These stats are completely useless because the applicability of these stats in predicting future outcomes are based on assumptions that aren't fulfilled.
For example, for Spurs vs Dallas, you can cite figures for outcomes when the Spurs win game 1. The figures for when the Spurs lose game 3 are completely different, and yet both occurred in that series. We both won game 1 and lost game 3 to go down 1-2.
Yes but he isn't concluding that based on those stats alone, that the outcome is a certainty. The numbers don't tell the entire story of course, but there is certainly a trend that can be used to make certain assumptions.
in other words anything could happen from here on out
Just the numbers...not a prediction of any sort.
Your comment doesn't even make sense..."applicability of these stats in predicting future outcomes are based on assumptions that aren't fulfilled." What is that?
The Spurs won game 1...that's the only "assumption that's fulfilled." You sound like a re .
My advice to you would be to say "we can't predict the future based on past history." At least then you wouldn't sound like an idiot.
They've lost twice after going up 2-0, Lakers in 2004 and OKC in 2012.
*throws up violently*
Hahaha, I was just going to say that these stats are useless when they are incorrect.
We got a black hawk down, we got a black hawk down! Super 61 is down. We got a bird down in the city!!
EHJ tha old school freestyle king, ain't no pro
The 2012 backdoor sweep hurts way more than 2004 despite .4 tbh.
The Spurs would have rolled Miami that year but would have gotten bent over by the Pistons in 2004 tbh.
'04 doesn't count.
I'm counting that one as a win.
No longer useless. I was recalling playoff history from memory, of course. .04 had been blocked from my mind thanks to therapy. Thanks for bringing it back, fvcker.
Yeah, no offense but you don't have the required background information in basic statistics to understand. Go read a textbook.
That's exactly what you can't do.
We got a black hawk down, we got a black hawk down! Super 61 is down. We got a bird down in the city!!
well it was worth a shot op
Agreed.
See: 2012 WCF vs. OKC.
See: 2004 WCSF vs. LAL.
Thanks Ed. Lets win this bithc!
I smell an imposter. The Chopper I know couldn't have made a thread about any statistic numbering 69 without making a sop ric sex joke. Tbh the presence of arithmetic at all is another red flag.
The two losses when the Spurs were up 2-0 were against the Lakers in 2004 and OKC in 2012
I presume you're laughing at his ignorance.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
