Series Thread: ECF: 2) Boston Celtics vs 8) Miami Heat

[tlance]

This isn’t differential calculus. It’s simple percentage math. Let’s not pretend that you guys are out here building bridges.

It is really simple math.

Which is why I am hoping someone outside this conversation can weigh in.

 

[The Q]

Personally, I thought in game 2 that Time Lord looked better in his minutes vs the zone than Horford did.

Theoretically the ability to stretch the floor vertically could be challenging if bam has to help on the penetration

Especially considering the lack of size and athleticism at pf for Miami…

 

[tlance]

This isn’t differential calculus. It’s simple percentage math. Let’s not pretend that you guys are out here building bridges.

Answer is:

# of teams to successfully come back from 0-2 with 2 home losses

Divided by total number of teams to lose the first 2 games at home

That easy

I just don’t have the 2nd number

Where is @dtgold88 when you need him?

 

[fightinfunbags]

Theoretically the ability to stretch the floor vertically could be challenging if bam has to help on the penetration

Especially considering the lack of size and athleticism at pf for Miami…

I felt like Time Lord’s presence gave them the ability to attack the middle of the zone and when the Heat reacted to the foul line pressure it gave him good looks around the rim. Horford can space in theory but he’s not shooting well right now.

 

[thunderc]

Answer is:

# of teams to successfully come back from 0-2 with 2 home losses

Divided by total number of teams to lose the first 2 games at home

That easy

I just don’t have the 2nd number

Where is @dtgold88 when you need him?

You are taking about a totally different number. Let’s start from scratch. You concede that down 0-2 the number is about 8 percent. Do you think the number when losing the first 2 at home is somehow higher than that?

 

[tlance]

You are taking about a totally different number. Let’s start from scratch. You concede that down 0-2 the number is about 8 percent. Do you think the number when losing the first 2 at home is somehow higher than that?

Yes.

I actually just found it on basketball reference.

We will do an apples to apples comparison. So this data only includes best of 7 series in the 2-2-1-1-1 format.

Since 1984, there have been 25 occasions where the home team has gone down 0-2.

4 of them won.

4/25 = 16%

 

[thunderc]

Yes.

I actually just found it on basketball reference.

We will an apples to apples comparison. So this data only includes best of 7 series in the 2-2-1-1-1 format.

Since 1984, there have been 25 occasions where the home team has gone down 0-2.

4 of them won.

4/25 = 16%

Ok now take 16 percent of the 8 percent and you have the answer.

 

[fightinfunbags]

You are taking about a totally different number. Let’s start from scratch. You concede that down 0-2 the number is about 8 percent. Do you think the number when losing the first 2 at home is somehow higher than that?

You’re not aggregating the data the right way. The percentage can’t be acquired taking the number of teams down 2-0 having dropped two home games divided by the total number of teams that have had a 2-0 lead. You have to take number of teams that have won a series after losing the first two two home games divided by total number of teams who have dropped the first two home games to go down 0-2.

 

[tlance]

You’re not aggregating the data the right way. The percentage can’t be acquired taking the number of teams down 2-0 having dropped two home games divided by the total number of teams that have had a 2-0 lead. You have to take number of teams that have won a series after losing the first two two home games divided by total number of teams who have dropped the first two home games to go down 0-2.

Thank you.

Exactly what I have been trying to say all along.

 

[tlance]

Ok now take 16 percent of the 8 percent and you have the answer.

Nope.

You have been wrong this whole time.

 

[fightinfunbags]

Can we move on now?

 

[thunderc]

Thank you.

Exactly what I have been trying to say all along.

And you are trying to say that the percentage of teams that win from losing the first 2 at home is greater than the overall percentage of teams that won from0-2 total. Not possible, it’s a subset.

 

[thunderc]

Nope.

You have been wrong this whole time.

You have been talking about something different the whole time. My math is correct.

 

[tlance]

Ok now take 16 percent of the 8 percent and you have the answer.

And by the way, the reason you had a different number considering the total (7.4%) was because the article I read only looked at best of 7 series and did not include 102 occasions where a team went down 0-2 in a best of 5.

 

[tlance]

You have been talking about something different the whole time. My math is correct.

Maybe.

But your logic is not.

 

[thunderc]

Can we move on now?

I’ll take your que, don’t give a rip what you do.

 

[thunderc]

Maybe.

But your logic is not.

Apparently you don’t know what logic is.

 

[tlance]

And you are trying to say that the percentage of teams that win from losing the first 2 at home is greater than the overall percentage of teams that won from0-2 total. Not possible, it’s a subset.

I am saying that the percentage of teams who win after trailing 0-2 at home is greater than the percentage of teams who win after trailing 0-2 on the road.

And I just proved it.

 

[tlance]

Apparently you don’t know what logic is.

I don’t know what to tell you man.

I broke it down clearly. Just had a 3rd party tell you are looking at it wrong.

At some point maybe own that you messed up?

 

[tlance]

Can we move on now?

I am ready.

Would love for @thunderc to acknowledge that he might have messed up, but not holding my breath.