Jump to content
Rhom

NBA Playoffs 2020: Mamba Out

Recommended Posts

Good game.  If the Lakers role players can hit open shots, lebron will win them a championship.  But they've been spotty all night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mamba jerseys are no longer undefeated and neither is LeBron in a championship-clinching game.

Also, cut Kuzma.

Edited by Red Tiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Red Tiger said:

The mamba jerseys are no longer undefeated

Are they regularly rotated or do the Lakers choose to wear them specifically? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Red Tiger said:

The mamba jerseys are no longer undefeated and neither is LeBron in a championship-clinching game.

Also, cut Kuzma.

I'm so confused by him. Lakers kept the wrong young player....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm so confused by him. Lakers kept the wrong young player....

Yeah, should have totally kept Lonzo... :lol: 

Seriously though, given the choice of keeping Ingram or Kuzma up to that point, it was a no brainer to keep Kuzma.  There was no way to predict that he’d be the only guy in league history to get worse playing with LeBron. :dunno: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Proudfeet said:

Are they regularly rotated or do the Lakers choose to wear them specifically? 

Lakers wear them specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2020 at 10:16 AM, Tywin et al. said:

And I'll get back to your last post in a bit, 

Still waiting. I was going to drop it, but looking at how you were being a dick in the US Politics thread, figured you could take a dose of your own medicine.

7 hours ago, Red Tiger said:

Lakers wear them specifically.

Thanks. It'd have been nice if they could have gone through this season undefeated, but choosing when to wear them is also kind of like challenging the other team to beat you. Not that they need the extra motivation even in a regular season game, but its an interesting dynamic. Wonder if other teams have similar jerseys as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Proudfeet said:

Still waiting. I was going to drop it, but looking at how you were being a dick in the US Politics thread, figured you could take a dose of your own medicine.

Shit, that's fair. I did forget to respond.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 2:54 PM, Proudfeet said:

1. Never seen that from you.

2. And it would be a different picture painted. Hence my original point. 

3. It's only mutating because you are dodging it. I've been accommodating with your tangents which is why it keeps moving and have always emphasised my original point. Again, the original point was last x of y is not a complete dataset. Not how well the Warriors do or not.

Exactly my point. Here's what I said then and quoted 2 posts above.

And they aren't on this forum why would I send it to them.

Top reporters. Statistical analysis is different from x and o analysis or information reporting or in depth player interviews or trivia click bait. They aren't mutually exclusive and one isn't superior to the other but it's not exactly a good endorsement. People put out click bait even if they don't believe in it too. They do need to eat.

Did you see ESPN's preview of this series by the way? 

Most points in the paint in postseason since 2006. 1. LeBron. 2. Duncan (retired long ago) 3. (Someone retired long ago) 4. Parker (practically the same as Duncan) 5. Dwight (Not a feature in a postseason for awhile). I'm not even sure anyone in the Miami team has been in the NBA then outside of Haslem who is practically an assistant coach now. 

4. Its not per game or per possession or past maybe 3 seasons where more players would be eligible. Its total points scored since 2006 which is convenient for LeBron. :rolleyes: We know LeBron's good. You don't have to rig it that hard.

5. Finally. I don't know why its so hard to communicate with you. That's all I wanted to know. Without the game seven tangent. Who cares? I wasn't calling him bad because of that. I made the observation before the Nuggets series. Mentioning it for the third time this page by the way.

This will be easier if I just number things.

1. I do all the time. I thought the Clippers would easily win the title this year, before everything went insane and even after. And I was wrong.

2. But your point was based on a hypothetical, not reality. 

3. Er, what? Just take the Astros, for example. Their record was sub .500, but they've been going nuts in the playoffs. Do you care more about their regular season or playoff record when predicting the next game?

4. Are you on team "I Hate Random Stats."? I do get that some are awful, but others do help. You cited my comment on Bird. That was meant to show how the game changed. It's less helpful to know that Butler was the first person to win a Finals game while having a 40 point triple double, but it was still a talking point on every sports show. 

5.  It really isn't. Have you ever heard of the "narcissism of small differences?" This whole time it has felt like you've wanted me to say an "O" is a "0."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

This will be easier if I just number things.

1. I do all the time. I thought the Clippers would easily win the title this year, before everything went insane and even after. And I was wrong.

2. But your point was based on a hypothetical, not reality. 

3. Er, what? Just take the Astros, for example. Their record was sub .500, but they've been going nuts in the playoffs. Do you care more about their regular season or playoff record when predicting the next game?

4. Are you on team "I Hate Random Stats."? I do get that some are awful, but others do help. You cited my comment on Bird. That was meant to show how the game changed. It's less helpful to know that Butler was the first person to win a Finals game while having a 40 point triple double, but it was still a talking point on every sports show. 

5.  It really isn't. Have you ever heard of the "narcissism of small differences?" This whole time it has felt like you've wanted me to say an "O" is a "0."

 

1. Let's amend that. You never admit to mistakes others point out.

2. It doesn't matter. That's not the point. The point is you wouldn't know because its an incomplete picture.

3. Its not about it being a run. Its about you insisting its a complete and total record. You don't take a run to compare against a complete record. Its basic comparing apples to apples. But that's besides the point. You insisted that it was complete, total and final.
Here's your quotes from last year again. 

Spoiler


Quote

Actually I don’t think it’s cherry-picked. I think those are actually the two separate records over the last three seasons.

Quote

I think that is the total record over the last 3 seasons. KD has missed 38 regular season games and 4 playoff games since joining the Warriors. Over that same time Curry has missed 46 regular season games and 6 playoff games. It’s not inconceivable to believe that there have only been 28 games in which KD missed and Curry played, and in those the Warriors are now 27-1.

Quote

I noticed that too. I tend to trust Basketball Reference, but I’ll have to check another site or see if I miscounted. However, I do recall reading an article around midseason that looked at how the Warriors played when they were missing one of their Big 4, and it was clear that Curry was the one they missed the most.


 

My response to that

Quote

Feels like we are talking past each other. I get that your point is that Curry is the most important, but I'm not contesting that. It just annoys me that stats are misrepresented frequently.

And your final response

Quote

This is the last I’ll say of this. No, it is not a misrepresentation. The stat was not cherry-picked. Everything I’ve found on the Googles indicates that Steph has literally only lost once when KD wasn’t playing. This is a team that went 73-9 without KD, after all.

And what I said this year.

Spoiler


Quote

And the only thing I remember about last year was your dumb belief in the Warriors record with Steph and without KD even though all the articles were explicit in their word usage. Seriously. There is only one way last x of y is going to go.

Quote

Stop skirting the issue. Its dumb because it showed your lack of reading comprehension. It has nothing to do with basketball. 

Quote

 

Let me spell it out for you again. You insisted that the record which was that Curry only lost 3 or so times out of the last 20 odd times was definite, final and the entire record.

I told you that whenever anyone mentioned last x times, it means that the record is incomplete and it wouldn't look as good if you were to even look for the one game before that. You vehemently denied it and insisted and made me look for the exact games which you then shut up and pretended never existed. So yes, it was dumb.

 

Quote

Yes, lets look. This wasn't deleted. It was never about the basketball. It was your reading comprehension in case you missed it the past two posts. I'd give you that the third post before this wasn't that clear.

Quote

Your entire point was that it was 1 loss and that was final. My position was that half baked stats are dishonest and you don't know. I don't know why you are trying to spin that.


 

4.

No. I'm on teams "Don't misuse stats." "You're obviously misleading people with these stats" "Are you an idiot?"

Trivia is fine mostly. Its good for banter. Its when people take it further and use it to make or insinuate a "statistically backed analysis" that gets me.

Its been awhile, but I don't recall commenting on Bird? And again, who cares what is popular or not? That's another topic from whether its relevant. Butler did have an excellent game and he would still have been the story even if he didn't have the stat line. It just happened that he had it and there's another angle of discussion. 

5. No, I had to google it. Its not about small differences though. Its like we're on entirely different wavelengths to begin with. It's more like me asking you what comes after O/0 and you telling me its an alphabet/number. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Proudfeet said:

Still waiting. I was going to drop it, but looking at how you were being a dick in the US Politics thread, figured you could take a dose of your own medicine.

Thanks. It'd have been nice if they could have gone through this season undefeated, but choosing when to wear them is also kind of like challenging the other team to beat you. Not that they need the extra motivation even in a regular season game, but its an interesting dynamic. Wonder if other teams have similar jerseys as well.

Indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez.....

6 hours ago, Proudfeet said:

1. Let's amend that. You never admit to mistakes others point out.

I do all the time. I have no problem admitting mistakes. You just happen to think you've made a valid point, when in fact you haven't.

Quote

 2. It doesn't matter. That's not the point. The point is you wouldn't know because its an incomplete picture.

What? So are you now the governor of what is complete? Are you the old man scream "Who cares if the Heat had a 27 game winning streak? They lost the games before and after that streak started!!11!!!"?

Who does that?
 

Quote

 3. Its not about it being a run. Its about you insisting its a complete and total record. You don't take a run to compare against a complete record. Its basic comparing apples to apples. But that's besides the point. You insisted that it was complete, total and final.
Here's your quotes from last year again. 

    

No, it's not. Literally the first two things you quoted start with me saying "I think," meaning I'm not making an absolute claim, and I am repeatedly citing the numbers professional writers are using. 
 

Quote

4.

No. I'm on teams "Don't misuse stats." "You're obviously misleading people with these stats" "Are you an idiot?"

Trivia is fine mostly. Its good for banter. Its when people take it further and use it to make or insinuate a "statistically backed analysis" that gets me.

You seem to be on team "don't use stats I don't like." The complaint you're registering is literally against winning streaks. 

Quote

5. No, I had to google it. Its not about small differences though. Its like we're on entirely different wavelengths to begin with. It's more like me asking you what comes after O/0 and you telling me its an alphabet/number.

It's a good construct to be familiar with, and it applies here. Your actual disagreement with me is pretty small, and in the above which I didn't re-quote, you actually agreed with me. You just wanted to nitpick an aspect of it, one in which doesn't even change the outcome at all. That's probably why it feels like we're on different wavelengths for you. It's because you're searching for an area to disagree. It's the only thing I can come up with because the response to "Hey, I read this team is 27-1 over their last 28 games with these conditions in place" isn't usually "But what happened in the 29th game?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Jeez.....

I do all the time. I have no problem admitting mistakes. You just happen to think you've made a valid point, when in fact you haven't.

:rolleyes:

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

What? So are you now the governor of what is complete? Are you the old man scream "Who cares if the Heat had a 27 game winning streak? They lost the games before and after that streak started!!11!!!"?

Who does that?

Uh, you have to take it together with the fact that you're comparing Curry's streak to Durant's full record. Although yes, I do still have problems with journalists quoting it, but that's another topic.

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

No, it's not. Literally the first two things you quoted start with me saying "I think," meaning I'm not making an absolute claim, and I am repeatedly citing the numbers professional writers are using. 

Let's see.

Quote

This is the last I’ll say of this. No, it is not a misrepresentation. The stat was not cherry-picked. Everything I’ve found on the Googles indicates that Steph has literally only lost once when KD wasn’t playing. This is a team that went 73-9 without KD, after all.

Literally isn't absolute? Everything you've found?

Like, on my first read, I realised that it isn't complete. Can you explain how you didn't believe it was one and only one based on the above quote? Yes, you are citing "professional writers". I like how you are shifting the blame. But you know, anyone who has two cells to rub together would know that it wasn't only one, which you keep trying to dodge.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt for multiple posts and tried to tell you that wasn't the case which resulted in the above quote where you dug your heels in, planted your flag and declared it your territory. 

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

You seem to be on team "don't use stats I don't like." The complaint you're registering is literally against winning streaks.

What? I make lots of other complains.

And it's not don't use stats I don't like. It's I don't like stats used improperly. There's a clear distinction. The stat by itself is fine, what I take issue with is when they are used to support a conclusion improperly.

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's a good construct to be familiar with, and it applies here. Your actual disagreement with me is pretty small, and in the above which I didn't re-quote, you actually agreed with me. You just wanted to nitpick an aspect of it, one in which doesn't even change the outcome at all. That's probably why it feels like we're on different wavelengths for you. It's because you're searching for an area to disagree. It's the only thing I can come up with because the response to "Hey, I read this team is 27-1 over their last 28 games with these conditions in place" isn't usually "But what happened in the 29th game?"

No, no, no. You came around to my position one year later. The quotes are literally there.

And look, when I ask if Kawhi is better or worse and you tell me top three. It doesn't answer anything. That's where the different wavelength comes in. He can still be top three if he's the same, better and worse. Your answers don't match. It's the same for this thing. I'm not talking about the KD vs Curry. Which is what you keep trying to make the conversation about instead. What I'm talking about is your inability to conclude that the last x of y isn't complete. You trying to tell me but the Curry is so much betters!?/[email protected]!? has zero relevance.

And to be clear, I'm not "searching for areas to disagree". You are the person who were insisting on it despite my many attempts to talk you out of it when it wasn't even originally about you. What was about you was me mocking you. It's not disagreeing. What I disagree with now is your refusal to admit that you said one and only one, literally just one, its so believable based on their previous year's record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...