Joe Vancil's prediction

[Guest]

When Joe Vancil predicted Seattle over San Antonio, I was little surprised. Now after watching yesterday's game, it seems that his prediction is going to come true.

I think there is a big disparity between Pop and Nate. Looks like, Pop is good only for regular season (disciplined effort from his team to get maximum no. of wins), whereas in playoffs, one needs innovation and adjustments which he clearly lack.

[Reality]

:cheers:  :cheers:

Sign in!
I don't know if Pops offensive ineptitude will sink the Spurs vs the Sonics, but he's trying.  

[SPURSX3]

:cheers:  :cheers:

Sign in!
I don't know if Pops offensive ineptitude will sink the Spurs vs the Sonics, but he's trying.

I dont think Pop was the reason for the loss, I mean tim had 35 points, spurs stood around and allowed players to push them away from the boards for refunds etc.  the play support for tim didnt show up whatsoever last night.  pop tried mutliple rotations and THE biggest message he could give the team is exactly what he did - PULL TIM.  I shut it off after tim got pulled from the game, I hope he sat out the rest of the night, that squad didnt deserve to have him out there as bad as they were playing.  While the sonics could beat us in this series - to me THEY SHOULD NOT even be even in this series.  Better team - no, better defense - no.  just a bunch of players that gave up - AGAIN.  nothing ticks me off more than seeing my team play like that.  what are they thinking???  this team should have swept the sonics.  Yet hee we are tied up, playing at home - yes, but what does that mean if the rest of the team plays like teams are going to just roll over and die.  they need to play strong and without compassion for the other team.  I hope the Spurs get back on track in game 5 and close this thing out in game 6.  we shouldnt even be in this spot - does any other team let thier city down in such a drastic fashion as the Spurs have???  they go from being a powerhouse to a lottery like team OVERNIGHT!!!  does any other team do that??? :nonono:  :nonono:  :nonono:  

[Reality]

:cheers:  :cheers:

Sign in!
I don't know if Pops offensive ineptitude will sink the Spurs vs the Sonics, but he's trying.

I dont think Pop was the reason for the loss,

Game 3 is the one I'm talking about.  Stand n Veg Dump it to Tim offense in many key possessions, esp in 4th.  After the game Pop is quoted as saying the Spurs loss in Game 3 -the biggest thing to him was their lack of D.

Guy just doesnt get it.

The Spurs played fantastic D in Game 3.

If "Defense alone wins championships" and it doesn't, however if defense combined with offense wins championships, then consider..

Nate Mc said of Sonic win Gm 4 that it "started on the defensive end."  Now what better way to jack up the Sonics defense then to blitz them with an ALL OUT offense?  Combined with the usual tough Spurs D.  Too many times down the floor Spurs opponents every one on D just stops and rests for several seconds.  The Spurs opponents know its gonna be Dump it to Tim with no cutters constantly.

2005 playoffs
5 Spurs wins 100+ pts
1 Spurs win under 100 pts.

3 Spurs losses all under 100 pts.

[SPURSX3]

:cheers:  :cheers:

Sign in!
I don't know if Pops offensive ineptitude will sink the Spurs vs the Sonics, but he's trying.

I dont think Pop was the reason for the loss,

Game 3 is the one I'm talking about.  Stand n Veg Dump it to Tim offense in many key possessions, esp in 4th.  After the game Pop is quoted as saying the Spurs loss in Game 3 -the biggest thing to him was their lack of D.

Guy just doesnt get it.

The Spurs played fantastic D in Game 3.

If "Defense alone wins championships" and it doesn't, however if defense combined with offense wins championships, then consider..

Nate Mc said of Sonic wins Gm 3 and 4 that it "started on the defensive end."  Now what better way to jack up the Sonics defense then to blitz them with an ALL OUT offense?  Combined with the usual tough Spurs D.  Too many times down the floor Spurs opponents every one on D just stops and rests for several seconds.  The Spurs opponents know its gonna be Dump it to Tim with no cutters constantly.

2005 playoffs
5 Spurs wins 100+ pts
1 Spurs win under 100 pts.

3 Spurs losses all under 100 pts.

I think hoome court allows for a little tougher play by each team this year for some reason, the refs let a lot of stuff go by for every team on the home court and dont call them fouls.  which is fine, the good teams work around that and win.  I cant say Pop was the reason for game three either reality - this is not to say he is a bad coach or not a bad coach - but you can look at the free throw numbers in game 3 and see there the biggest problem was - the spurs got to the line, but then they didnt make a lot of them either.  I think it's more the mental downfall athletes do to them selves that is making them fall so short in game 3 and 4.  the spurs ARE the better team, yet they are playing like they cant beat the sonics....why???

game five needs a change in attitude on the rest of the team to come not just to play, but to embarrass and destroy the sonics for the rest of this series.  they need to play tough, seattle did, and look what it got them.  

[Reality]

Without a doubt the Sonics got home cooking.  Couple fouls against GNob like the Fortson Flop. :rofl:

To Pops credit in the last 5 years, everytime the Spurs sunk to what seemed like a low to which they could not climb out of, they climbed.  Exception being last years .4 choker.  Which once again was certainly not the Spurs D that cost them, 74-73.

[westkoast]

Oh man that Forston flop was the greatest.  Vlade would have been proud of that one.  All night this guy is tossing bodies around by shifting his feet and then Manu lightly hits him and he falls over. :rofl:

I said it during the last loss and Ill say it again after this loss....the Spurs' players are equally to blame for this boring stand and veg offense as Pop is.  I watched them just stand around last night.  No picks were being set for the perimeter guys and there were no cuts to the basket.  You dont even have to catch the ball and score if you cut, just cut.  That would at least make the defense have to move and work.

[SPURSX3]

Without a doubt the Sonics got home cooking.  Couple fouls against GNob like the Fortson Flop. :rofl:

To Pops credit in the last 5 years, everytime the Spurs sunk to what seemed like a low to which they could not climb out of, they climbed.  Exception being last years .4 choker.  Which once again was certainly not the Spurs D that cost them, 74-73.

*****SPURSX3 bring out massive spotlight to signal the call for Eva Longoria*****

Tony needs help quick!   :cheers:  

[Guest_Randy]

Several things:

First, I understand Eva has a new beau -- her's normally last at least two or three weeks before she moves on.

Second, the Spurs beat the Sonics by penetrating into the lane.  The Sonics just couldn't keep Parker and Manu from getting into the lane and then either making their shot or passing to an wide open shooter.  Rashard Lewis absence forced to insert Antonio Daniels into the lineup.  Lewis wasn't doing anything to help the Sonics defensively and he really wasn't playing great offensively -- Daniels helped the Sonics keep the Spurs backcourt out of the middle.  And Parker and Manu have KILLED the Sonics in the games the Spurs have won.  

The Sonics also ruled the boards -- okay, call me a bit surprised by that stat.  While I think the Sonics are a vastly improved rebounding team from last year, they shouldn't be able to outrebound the Spurs.  Add TO's to the rebound category and it's no wonder the Spurs lost.  However, the Spurs would have to continue to lose in these categories in order for the Sonics to take the series -- and I just don't see that happening (as much as I would love to see the Sonics take out the Spurs!!!).
 

[SPURSX3]

Several things:

First, I understand Eva has a new beau -- her's normally last at least two or three weeks before she moves on.

Second, the Spurs beat the Sonics by penetrating into the lane.  The Sonics just couldn't keep Parker and Manu from getting into the lane and then either making their shot or passing to an wide open shooter.  Rashard Lewis absence forced to insert Antonio Daniels into the lineup.  Lewis wasn't doing anything to help the Sonics defensively and he really wasn't playing great offensively -- Daniels helped the Sonics keep the Spurs backcourt out of the middle.  And Parker and Manu have KILLED the Sonics in the games the Spurs have won.  

The Sonics also ruled the boards -- okay, call me a bit surprised by that stat.  While I think the Sonics are a vastly improved rebounding team from last year, they shouldn't be able to outrebound the Spurs.  Add TO's to the rebound category and it's no wonder the Spurs lost.  However, the Spurs would have to continue to lose in these categories in order for the Sonics to take the series -- and I just don't see that happening (as much as I would love to see the Sonics take out the Spurs!!!).

I heard the same thing about Eva's til they showed her at the last Spurs home game cheering Tony on... :cheers:


friends with benefits?  maybe open relationship?  


 

[Joe Vancil]

Well, I hate to throw water on my reputation as a prognosticator, but better I do it before Skander beats me to the punch.

The reasons I picked Seattle over San An are that:

1)  I didn't believe Duncan would be healthy.
2)  I didn't believe San An could guard Rashard Lewis.
3)  I think Tony Parker and Greg Popovich are highly overrated.



 

[SPURSX3]

Well, I hate to throw water on my reputation as a prognosticator, but better I do it before Skander beats me to the punch.

The reasons I picked Seattle over San An are that:

1)  I didn't believe Duncan would be healthy.
2)  I didn't believe San An could guard Rashard Lewis.
3)  I think Tony Parker and Greg Popovich are highly overrated.

tony and Pop overrated??




















 :nonono: I hope your fur falls off right before winter :nonono:  

[ziggy]

There is a formula designed for baseball called the Pythagorean winning percentage.  It predicts wins and losses based upon a formula, and it has an accuracy rate of 99%.  For this past year in the NBA it had an accuracy rate of 1/2 win per team.
For the years in which Popovich has been the head coach of the Spurs, his teams have won 379 games, and the formula predicted that they should have won 405.  The difference of 26 games is 4 wins per season.

How this works is it looks at points scored and points allowed.  The biggest reason for the difference is that team can often win big seldom lose big, but often lose close games at a rate higher than would be expected.  In the case of the Popovich he has one of the worst differentials of any significant coach.  This indicates they lose close games at a much higher rate than you would expect.

Two of the 3 best years for Popovich the Spurs won the title.  This year the difference was 6 games (they won 59 and the Pythagorean winning percentage predicted 65 wins).  In the years that the difference is the greatest the Spurs play poorly in the playoffs.

Just for comparison sake
Phil Jackson had a negative 0.5 games a season, certainly within the margin for error.
Flip Saunders had a positive of almost 2 games a season.
Rick Adleman had a career negative of -2+ games per year.
PJ Carlisemo had a career negative of -6+ games per year.
Jerry Sloan had a career negative of just about 1 game per year, or just outside the margin for error.
 

[Reality]

There is a formula designed for baseball called the Pythagorean winning percentage.  It predicts wins and losses based upon a formula, and it has an accuracy rate of 99%.  For this past year in the NBA it had an accuracy rate of 1/2 win per team.
 

intelligent life forms on the board...
Props ziggy.


How does the Py formula exactly work?  99%.  You're going to have some betters knocking on your door.

[ziggy]

There is a formula designed for baseball called the Pythagorean winning percentage.  It predicts wins and losses based upon a formula, and it has an accuracy rate of 99%.  For this past year in the NBA it had an accuracy rate of 1/2 win per team.
 

intelligent life forms on the board...
Props ziggy.


How does the Py formula exactly work?  99%.  You're going to have some betters knocking on your door.

The precise formula and a description for basketball is

About the Pythagorean Method for Calcualting Win Pct.

The Pythagorean Method gives an expected winning percentage using the fact that the ratio of a team's wins and losses is related to the number of points scored by the team raised to some exponent, which is usually taken to be 16.5.

Expected Winning % = (Pts scored)^(16.5)/(Pts scored^(16.5) + Pts allowed^(16.5))

Points scored to the power of 16.5 / (Points scored to the power of 16.5) + (Points allowed to the power of 16.5)  =  expected winning %, which then converts into the number of wins.

For baseball the exponent would be 1.83, which is related to the total runs scored which is low compared to basketball points scored which is high.