Posted by Knight:

Teams do play better at home, but if you're a crappy team, it won't make you that much better.

What's a crappy team? .400 winning percentage and below? .350? That's an interesting claim you're making, but you need to back it up. It could just as well be that the relative benefit for crappy teams playing at home as opposed to the road is even more pronounced than it is for good teams-- that makes sense to me as well. The only way to get a better idea of how this shakes out is to look at how crappy teams have done historically at home vs. on the road, and compare that to how non-crappy teams have done at home vs. on the road.

Posted by tomverve:

Posted by Knight:

Teams do play better at home, but if you're a crappy team, it won't make you that much better.

What's a crappy team? .400 winning percentage and below? .350? That's an interesting claim you're making, but you need to back it up. It could just as well be that the relative benefit for crappy teams playing at home as opposed to the road is even more pronounced than it is for good teams-- that makes sense to me as well. The only way to get a better idea of how this shakes out is to look at how crappy teams have done historically at home vs. on the road, and compare that to how non-crappy teams have done at home vs. on the road.

You don't know what a crappy team is? You're full of it. Next time you say that the Knicks will be a good team I will ask you to define what a good team is.

Posted by tomverve:

I'm not full of it, I'm just asking you to back up what you say.

You can't back up everything you say, it's impossible, but teams who suck do not become a great team through some kind of home court magic.

Posted by tomverve:

You can back something up when someone asks you to. Maybe not completely perfectly, but it can be done. I even laid out some parameters for you, all you have to do is look up the numbers.

Thanks for the parameters. I owe you one.

[Edited by - Knight on 12-12-2005 12:19 AM]

Posted by tomverve:

OK. I say you're wrong. Crappy teams actually benefit more than good team from playing at home. Who's right? Well, I guess if we don't bother putting any thought and effort into the conversation, we'll never know.

I'll savor the mystery.

Posted by tomverve:

If you want to savor the mystery, God knows why you started a thread asking "Is homecourt really an advantage for us?" Sounds more like you want to peddle your viewpoint rather than having a thoughtful conversation.

I'm sorry I'm not doing the kind of research required to post on an internet fan forum.

Posted by tomverve:

Research isn't required in order to post on an internet forum. However, sometimes it is required in order to have an intelligent and productive conversation.

Well, I'm not intelligent or productive, but I still like to post here.

A lot of the game is mental. The Knicks being home gives them a bit more confidence and teams tend to fight a little harder when they're in front of their home fans. I don't really count the 1st 2 losses that heavily. We were lightyears from where the team is now. The players are much more familiar with the scheme and each other. The teams is much more confident now. I don't think we'll win every game, but over the longhaul, this home stretch will prove to be a net positive for this team and that's all we want. .500 is a bit too pessimistic. I mean come on. They will face enough beatable competition to make sure the home record is a good deal better than that.

Posted by Knight:

Well, I'm not intelligent or productive, but I still like to post here.

No argument from me on that one.