Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

playa2 wrote:

3G4G wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:Imagine if Indy would had kept Leonard ... I would've ranked them above Miami

Logically it probably wouldn't have worked because they Danny Granger/Paul George already there. They needed a point guard and they got George Hill. You can't play Granger/George/Leonard high rotation minutes...wouldn't worked as you wouldn't be maximizing your assets.

I think proves more so is the Spurs always have competent people in their organization to make those kind of decisions that leads to those moves being made.

If any organization should copied it's them and it's been this way for over decade. They are the model organization above all others.

Yea take away Robinson and Duncan and they would have been like everyone else. The character those two put on display made everybody else fall in line. No Duncan or Robinson and the culture wouldn't have changed in San Antonio. Coach Pop would not have lasted without those guys setting the tone to buy in.

Hows that "pressure to win at home" thing working out?

Its just not relevant.

You're a clown , you only remember one side of the theory, and for that "I laugh at you" LOL

You left out the most important element, the visiting team brining it and playing hard for 48 minutes. You sumpin !

Right either the home team gets tight because the road team brings it for 48 min and the home team loses OR the home team doesn't get tight because the road team didn't bring it for 48 min and thus the home team wins.
Your theory amounts to nothing more than "either the home or road team will win." You just then added a few vague statements to the theory.

No, the home team gets tight because of the pressure from family, the fans, and local media who all expect them to win. so when the visiting team brings it for 48 minutes they will have the advantage in a tightly contested playoff game. Now when the visiting team doesn't bring it , the home team with their fans cheering them on , it gives them momentum and works in a positive way.

The game is 90% mental and 10% physical. Bonn I don't expect you and Nalod agree and I definitely don't expect you guys to understand.LOL

You're just adding one more vague statement - pressure from family, fans, media.
To use formal language, the problem is you're inferring cause from effect. You see that the home team is winning (effect or outcome) and that is your evidence that (a) there must have been too much family etc pressure and (b) the road team is "bringing it for 48 min." Likewise, if you see the home team is losing, then that itself is your evidence that the road team is "bringing it for 48 min."
If you had some way independent of the outcome to measure these factors (family pressure, road team bringing it) and could then show that those measurements predicted the outcome of the game, that would be another story.

I was following this discussion with interest. Was there a response to this?
Very novel, Playa2 very novel.

What people don't understand is you don't see the visiting team bring it for 48 minutes and the home team still win in these playoffs. WHY IS THAT !

If it's close they can't deal with the added pressure of fans and media they turn the ball over or start clanking shots.

What exactly does "bring it for 48 minutes" mean anyway?

playa2 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

playa2 wrote:

3G4G wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:Imagine if Indy would had kept Leonard ... I would've ranked them above Miami

Logically it probably wouldn't have worked because they Danny Granger/Paul George already there. They needed a point guard and they got George Hill. You can't play Granger/George/Leonard high rotation minutes...wouldn't worked as you wouldn't be maximizing your assets.

I think proves more so is the Spurs always have competent people in their organization to make those kind of decisions that leads to those moves being made.

If any organization should copied it's them and it's been this way for over decade. They are the model organization above all others.

Yea take away Robinson and Duncan and they would have been like everyone else. The character those two put on display made everybody else fall in line. No Duncan or Robinson and the culture wouldn't have changed in San Antonio. Coach Pop would not have lasted without those guys setting the tone to buy in.

Hows that "pressure to win at home" thing working out?

Its just not relevant.

You're a clown , you only remember one side of the theory, and for that "I laugh at you" LOL

You left out the most important element, the visiting team brining it and playing hard for 48 minutes. You sumpin !

Right either the home team gets tight because the road team brings it for 48 min and the home team loses OR the home team doesn't get tight because the road team didn't bring it for 48 min and thus the home team wins.
Your theory amounts to nothing more than "either the home or road team will win." You just then added a few vague statements to the theory.

No, the home team gets tight because of the pressure from family, the fans, and local media who all expect them to win. so when the visiting team brings it for 48 minutes they will have the advantage in a tightly contested playoff game. Now when the visiting team doesn't bring it , the home team with their fans cheering them on , it gives them momentum and works in a positive way.

The game is 90% mental and 10% physical. Bonn I don't expect you and Nalod agree and I definitely don't expect you guys to understand.LOL

You're just adding one more vague statement - pressure from family, fans, media.
To use formal language, the problem is you're inferring cause from effect. You see that the home team is winning (effect or outcome) and that is your evidence that (a) there must have been too much family etc pressure and (b) the road team is "bringing it for 48 min." Likewise, if you see the home team is losing, then that itself is your evidence that the road team is "bringing it for 48 min."
If you had some way independent of the outcome to measure these factors (family pressure, road team bringing it) and could then show that those measurements predicted the outcome of the game, that would be another story.

I was following this discussion with interest. Was there a response to this?
Very novel, Playa2 very novel.

What people don't understand is you don't see the visiting team bring it for 48 minutes and the home team still win in these playoffs. WHY IS THAT !

If it's close they can't deal with the added pressure of fans and media they turn the ball over or start clanking shots.

What exactly does "bring it for 48 minutes" mean anyway?

Now I have to come down a few notches to your level to explain what bringing it means ?

WOW it's so simple I thought everyone knew.

CLASS IS IN SESSION

Bringing it for 48 minutes means you don't turn the ball over a lot, you play in your face(passing lanes) defense and on offense you make the most of your open looks with team ball movement. That in itself will intimidate every team on their home court and it quiets the home crowd too.

So all you're saying is that the team that plays better defense and offense will win? I bet no one else had figured that out.

spurs in 7,

book it, danny

knickscity wrote:

dk7th wrote:good idea to start ginobili. pops strategy is to build a big lead and hold it.

Manu starting only helps Manu.

Green and Neal likely will be ineffective.

probably. they tend to rush their shots unless they are set up by ginobili. still... better to get your best players playing together as much as possible. it's a must-win for both teams. so far the spurs are have built a 13-point lead.

tkf wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

playa2 wrote:

3G4G wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:Imagine if Indy would had kept Leonard ... I would've ranked them above Miami

Logically it probably wouldn't have worked because they Danny Granger/Paul George already there. They needed a point guard and they got George Hill. You can't play Granger/George/Leonard high rotation minutes...wouldn't worked as you wouldn't be maximizing your assets.

I think proves more so is the Spurs always have competent people in their organization to make those kind of decisions that leads to those moves being made.

If any organization should copied it's them and it's been this way for over decade. They are the model organization above all others.

Yea take away Robinson and Duncan and they would have been like everyone else. The character those two put on display made everybody else fall in line. No Duncan or Robinson and the culture wouldn't have changed in San Antonio. Coach Pop would not have lasted without those guys setting the tone to buy in.

Hows that "pressure to win at home" thing working out?

Its just not relevant.

You're a clown , you only remember one side of the theory, and for that "I laugh at you" LOL

You left out the most important element, the visiting team brining it and playing hard for 48 minutes. You sumpin !

Right either the home team gets tight because the road team brings it for 48 min and the home team loses OR the home team doesn't get tight because the road team didn't bring it for 48 min and thus the home team wins.
Your theory amounts to nothing more than "either the home or road team will win." You just then added a few vague statements to the theory.

No, the home team gets tight because of the pressure from family, the fans, and local media who all expect them to win. so when the visiting team brings it for 48 minutes they will have the advantage in a tightly contested playoff game. Now when the visiting team doesn't bring it , the home team with their fans cheering them on , it gives them momentum and works in a positive way.

The game is 90% mental and 10% physical. Bonn I don't expect you and Nalod agree and I definitely don't expect you guys to understand.LOL

You're just adding one more vague statement - pressure from family, fans, media.
To use formal language, the problem is you're inferring cause from effect. You see that the home team is winning (effect or outcome) and that is your evidence that (a) there must have been too much family etc pressure and (b) the road team is "bringing it for 48 min." Likewise, if you see the home team is losing, then that itself is your evidence that the road team is "bringing it for 48 min."
If you had some way independent of the outcome to measure these factors (family pressure, road team bringing it) and could then show that those measurements predicted the outcome of the game, that would be another story.

I was following this discussion with interest. Was there a response to this?
Very novel, Playa2 very novel.

What people don't understand is you don't see the visiting team bring it for 48 minutes and the home team still win in these playoffs. WHY IS THAT !

If it's close they can't deal with the added pressure of fans and media they turn the ball over or start clanking shots.

What exactly does "bring it for 48 minutes" mean anyway?

playa is hilarous.. "Bring it!!!"

Im going to make a very bold predication:

Unless the Heat outscore the Spurs in the second half, the Spurs will win!

I know, I know, its pretty ballsy for me to stick my neck out like that and open my self to ridicule but my intense cybermetric matrix attenuated formula metrics run by a NASA SuperComputer designed by the good folks at MIT got this like that.