U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-31-2017, 07:26 AM
 
2,838 posts, read 1,780,744 times
Reputation: 1243

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge View Post
I don't get how you can say that LBJ was better than KD, Kyrie was better than Curry, and Dray/Klay were bad, yet the series was 4-1 with 3 blowouts. It doesn't make any sense.

Draymond had the best DRtg of any player who played significant minutes in the Finals. My eyes saw help defense, box outs, and contested shots.

I recognize that Kyrie was out in '15. That is reality. It is also reality that Curry has always been a better player.
Please quote where I said Lebron was better than KD in that series. I'll wait patiently.

There were three blowouts (1,2,4 (Cavs)). One competitive game (5)- It was a five point game heading into the fourth, Another competitive game but an absolute giveaway from Cleveland (3).


We will disagree about Draymond.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-02-2017, 09:02 PM
 
2,286 posts, read 1,512,615 times
Reputation: 1143
Kyrie was awful. He had some good numbers a couple games I think, but he couldn't hit a single shot in Lebron's 2 minutes of rest. To listen to Skip try to plant the notion that Kyrie is better than and will beat Lebron as a Celtic is a total joke. I hope Kyrie does well, but if he thinks he can go toe-to-toe with James... maybe 10 years from now. The Cavs would have had a better shot at winning if their strategy was to just dribble out the shot clock, toss up a 3, and crash the boards. They might have gone -4 instead of -10 that way.

Lebron still was the best player in the series, but he's not perfect. Certainly made some mistakes. Durant was great, but I don't think there were any high-pressure moments for him. For James, any mistake was going to cost him because he had a team that couldn't do much without him. Even in the eastern conference playoffs, his team couldn't do jack when he was on the bench.

Still, as bad as Kyrie was, he looked like a god compared to Tristan Thompson's pathetic play.

This was still somehow one of those cases where the result is magnified over the actual competition. Take away a few Cavs mistakes, and it's 2-2. Have the Warriors miss a few shots, and it's 3-2 Cavs. Sort of like how there can often be a tiny difference between an 8-8 team and a 10-6 team in football. Sometimes that 10-6 team wins the super bowl.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 11:55 AM
 
3,565 posts, read 1,877,900 times
Reputation: 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by rarog View Post
Kyrie was awful. He had some good numbers a couple games I think, but he couldn't hit a single shot in Lebron's 2 minutes of rest. To listen to Skip try to plant the notion that Kyrie is better than and will beat Lebron as a Celtic is a total joke. I hope Kyrie does well, but if he thinks he can go toe-to-toe with James... maybe 10 years from now. The Cavs would have had a better shot at winning if their strategy was to just dribble out the shot clock, toss up a 3, and crash the boards. They might have gone -4 instead of -10 that way.

Lebron still was the best player in the series, but he's not perfect. Certainly made some mistakes. Durant was great, but I don't think there were any high-pressure moments for him. For James, any mistake was going to cost him because he had a team that couldn't do much without him. Even in the eastern conference playoffs, his team couldn't do jack when he was on the bench.

Still, as bad as Kyrie was, he looked like a god compared to Tristan Thompson's pathetic play.

This was still somehow one of those cases where the result is magnified over the actual competition. Take away a few Cavs mistakes, and it's 2-2. Have the Warriors miss a few shots, and it's 3-2 Cavs. Sort of like how there can often be a tiny difference between an 8-8 team and a 10-6 team in football. Sometimes that 10-6 team wins the super bowl.
Basketball is lower variance than football. That's because they play best of 7 & because an individual play is less important to the result. The Warriors are a great team, and they make opponents pay for mistakes (they also cause opponent mistakes). That's why they rolled over the Cavs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 12:36 PM
 
5,152 posts, read 2,772,564 times
Reputation: 4719
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge View Post
That's why they rolled over the Cavs.
They rolled over the Cavs because of Kevin Durant. Without KD, they lose just like in 2016, except probably 4-2 instead of 4-3.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 01:58 PM
 
11,680 posts, read 7,057,593 times
Reputation: 6387
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
They rolled over the Cavs because of Kevin Durant. Without KD, they lose just like in 2016, except probably 4-2 instead of 4-3.
2016 was a 7 game series. The Warriors could have came back embarrassed and hungrier. Who knows who wins that series.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 02:26 PM
 
2,286 posts, read 1,512,615 times
Reputation: 1143
Quote:
an individual play is less important to the result
?????????????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 03:09 PM
 
5,152 posts, read 2,772,564 times
Reputation: 4719
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
2016 was a 7 game series. The Warriors could have came back embarrassed and hungrier. Who knows who wins that series.
Well that's exactly what the Cavs did. They came back stronger, and without a Kevin Durant on the Warriors, Curry and Klay couldn't come back stronger (and Draymond took himself out of the equation by becoming Mr. Nut Kicker).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 03:58 PM
 
3,565 posts, read 1,877,900 times
Reputation: 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by rarog View Post
?????????????
Meaning football games often turn on one single play--for example, a fumble/interception leading to a defensive touchdown. The average basketball game has ~100 offensive possessions per game. Each one is a legitimate scoring opportunity, and every score is 1-3 points.

The average NFL game, by contrast, has more snaps (~130), but far fewer legit scoring opportunities. There are ~9 scores in the average NFL game--4.7 TDs & 3.6 Field Goals. A defensive back falling down on one pass play has a far bigger impact on the result of a football game than one big play in a basketball game. In other words, football has higher variance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 05:04 PM
 
2,286 posts, read 1,512,615 times
Reputation: 1143
Dude, you've completely lost it. NFL is the sport where you make the least impact. Everything is determined by how well a receiver runs his route, whether or not the RB picks up a block, how well the offensive line meshes as a unit, whether or not the QB sees the open guy. In the NBA, a guy like Lebron James can go to any average team and bring them to the NBA finals that same year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 05:11 PM
 
3,565 posts, read 1,877,900 times
Reputation: 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by rarog View Post
Dude, you've completely lost it. NFL is the sport where you make the least impact. Everything is determined by how well a receiver runs his route, whether or not the RB picks up a block, how well the offensive line meshes as a unit, whether or not the QB sees the open guy. In the NBA, a guy like Lebron James can go to any average team and bring them to the NBA finals that same year.
That's exactly why basketball is a lower variance sport. There are more opportunities for the better team to demonstrate its superiority. A couple of bad plays by a superior football team often lead to a loss against an inferior team: that's high variance. A couple of bad plays by a superior basketball team rarely lead to a loss against an inferior team: that's low variance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top