New York Knicks at Cleveland Cavs - Feb. 6, 7:30

• Pick6

  

  Skyhook79 wrote: "The best team doesn't always win. Upsets happen. Look at what happened in football today."
  
  In a 1 game winner take all, your right.
  In a 7 game series the better team wins.

  The Celtics must have been about 10x better than the Lakers in 08 then.
• Pick6

  

  And another thing, it can happen in a 7 game series.
  
  A couple year ago Golden State(who barely made it into the playoffs) beat the Mavericks who had the best record in the NBA in the first round. So yes, it can happen.
• jpake1

  

  ^ That train of thought again...
• Skyhook79

  

  Pick6 wrote:

  Skyhook79 wrote: "The best team doesn't always win. Upsets happen. Look at what happened in football today."
  
  In a 1 game winner take all, your right.
  In a 7 game series the better team wins.

  The Celtics must have been about 10x better than the Lakers in 08 then.

  The Celtics were the better team in 08 not 10x better it was 4games to 2.
  Now when the Spurs won it in 07 they were 10x better than the team they played because it was a sweep.
• Skyhook79

  

  Pick6 wrote: And another thing, it can happen in a 7 game series.
  
  A couple year ago Golden State(who barely made it into the playoffs) beat the Mavericks who had the best record in the NBA in the first round. So yes, it can happen.

  Golden State was better than the Mavericks that year. They were 3-0 against them in the regular season beating them by 3,17 and 29 pts. Then they smacked them in the playoffs the same way.
• Pick6

  

  your statements contradict themselves.
  Seeing that the Cavs were 2-0 over the Spurs in 06-07 regular season, wouldnt that mean the cavs should have won, or did an upset happen?
  Or what about how the Magic swept the Lakers in the regular season last year? Does that mean they were the better team or did the Lakers upset them?
• Skyhook79

  

  Pick6 wrote: your statements contradict themselves.
  Seeing that the Cavs were 2-0 over the Spurs in 06-07 regular season, wouldnt that mean the cavs should have won, or did an upset happen?
  Or what about how the Magic swept the Lakers in the regular season last year? Does that mean they were the better team or did the Lakers upset them?

  Winning a 7 game series always trumps regular season wins. When you couple regular season wins and a 7 game series win ala Golden St your better.
  Not that difficult to understand.
  Cleveland is 0-2 vs the Bobcats this year. Does that mean they are better than the Cavs? Probally not but if the Bobcats play the Cavs in the playoffs and beat them then you would have to say they were better after all.
  7 game series don't lie.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  Skyhook79 wrote:

  Pick6 wrote: And another thing, it can happen in a 7 game series.
  
  A couple year ago Golden State(who barely made it into the playoffs) beat the Mavericks who had the best record in the NBA in the first round. So yes, it can happen.

  Golden State was better than the Mavericks that year. They were 3-0 against them in the regular season beating them by 3,17 and 29 pts. Then they smacked them in the playoffs the same way.

  Golden State was not better than Dallas that year. It's not about upsets, it's about matchups. There are good players all around the league. Golden State played a style of ball that the Mavericks couldn't contend with and they had the talent to pull it off. Same thing happened to the Cavs with the Magic last year.
  
  You want to say you can't compare it to the Super Bowl because 7>1. What about the 82 game regular season--is that a big enough sample size for you? Team's separate themselves because they're better--like the Mavs did, they were better than Golden State and their record showed it. The matchups just didn't play in their favor, but overall they were the better team.
• Skyhook79

  

  "Golden State played a style of ball that the Mavericks couldn't contend with"
  
  
  Exactly, Golden State was better than the Mavericks because Dallas couldn't handle Golden State's style, hence the curbstomping's Golden St placed on them. Thank-you for proving my point.
• Footwedge

  wes_mantooth wrote: ^^^Weaknesses.....length on the defensive end.
  
  I think this team is better suited to play the Lakers, Boston and Orlando because of it.

  You're buying the bull shit. Tha Cavs allow more points this year per game than last year. Indisputable fact.
  
  If you guys want to feel better psychologically about "our length", knock yourself out. Last year, we allowed less than 92 points per game. This year, we allow more than 93 a game.
  
  And it has nothing to do with match ups. Zero. A bunch of pundit hooey that everone gets wrapped up with.
  
  Charlotte swept the Lakers last year. I suppose that LA didn't "match up" with them. Huh? LMAO.
• Footwedge

  Skyhook79 wrote: "The best team doesn't always win. Upsets happen. Look at what happened in football today."
  
  In a 1 game winner take all, your right.
  In a 7 game series the better team wins.

  And you are so full of shit, I can smell you through the computer wires.
  
  A few years ago, Tampa Bay beat the Yankees 12 to 8 during the regular season. TB finished 40 games behind NY.
  
  It happens in baseball, football, hockey and basketball. It has nothing to do with match ups either. It has to do the the simple laws of mathematics and laws of probability and statistics.
• Skyhook79

  

  Footwedge wrote:

  Skyhook79 wrote: "The best team doesn't always win. Upsets happen. Look at what happened in football today."
  
  In a 1 game winner take all, your right.
  In a 7 game series the better team wins.

  And you are so full of shit, I can smell you through the computer wires.
  
  A few years ago, Tampa Bay beat the Yankees 12 to 8 during the regular season. TB finished 40 games behind NY.
  
  It happens in baseball, football, hockey and basketball. It has nothing to do with match ups either. It has to do the the simple laws of mathematics and laws of probability and statistics.

  
  Did Tampa Bay play the Yankees in a 7 game series in the Playoffs that year???
  
  Now go back and crawl in your basement.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  All you do is cite a 7 game series and how it's more than 1 game--no shit Sherlock. So why do you choose to ignore the 82 regular season games? You still have yet to answer that, it seems like that would go right along with your thinking. It's not a fluke for a team to finish with the best record over the course of 82 games. Mavs>Warriors a few years ago, it was just a bad matchup for the Mavs. Same thing happened with the Cavs/Magic. Same thing happened with the Celtics/Magic last year. It's not rocket science, there is talent all over the league and in the playoffs you try to find advantages like exploiting the oppositions matchup problems.
• Footwedge

  Skyhook79 wrote:

  Footwedge wrote:

  Skyhook79 wrote: "The best team doesn't always win. Upsets happen. Look at what happened in football today."
  
  In a 1 game winner take all, your right.
  In a 7 game series the better team wins.

  And you are so full of shit, I can smell you through the computer wires.
  
  A few years ago, Tampa Bay beat the Yankees 12 to 8 during the regular season. TB finished 40 games behind NY.
  
  It happens in baseball, football, hockey and basketball. It has nothing to do with match ups either. It has to do the the simple laws of mathematics and laws of probability and statistics.

  
  Did Tampa Bay play the Yankees in a 7 game series in the Playoffs that year???
  
  Now go back and crawl in your basement.

  Is that it? That's all you've got? The "yo momma's basement" retort? By default you lose.
  
  I'll allign you with the rest of the idiots here that do not understand mathematics, probabilities, and statistics as it relates to sporting events.
  
  The best record in sports during the regular season makes you the best team going into the playoffs. The bigger the spread, the bigger favorite you become. Being the best team does not equal a guarantee of winning anything. It just gives you the best opportunity to win. People who somehow think the Cavs are not better off with the number one seed...are idots. Period. Discussion///
  
  I suppose Buster Douglas was a better fighter than Mike Tyson too. LMAO.
• Skyhook79

  

  Footwedge wrote:

  Skyhook79 wrote:

  Footwedge wrote:

  Skyhook79 wrote: "The best team doesn't always win. Upsets happen. Look at what happened in football today."
  
  In a 1 game winner take all, your right.
  In a 7 game series the better team wins.

  And you are so full of shit, I can smell you through the computer wires.
  
  A few years ago, Tampa Bay beat the Yankees 12 to 8 during the regular season. TB finished 40 games behind NY.
  
  It happens in baseball, football, hockey and basketball. It has nothing to do with match ups either. It has to do the the simple laws of mathematics and laws of probability and statistics.

  
  Did Tampa Bay play the Yankees in a 7 game series in the Playoffs that year???
  
  Now go back and crawl in your basement.

  Is that it? That's all you've got? The "yo momma's basement" retort? By default you lose.
  
  I'll allign you with the rest of the idiots here that do not understand mathematics, probabilities, and statistics as it relates to sporting events.
  
  The best record in sports during the regular season makes you the best team going into the playoffs. The bigger the spread, the bigger favorite you become. Being the best team does not equal a guarantee of winning anything. It just gives you the best opportunity to win. People who somehow think the Cavs are not better off with the number one seed...are idots. Period. Discussion///
  
  I suppose Buster Douglas was a better fighter than Mike Tyson too. LMAO.

  I didn't say anything about your momma's basement , I said your basement.
  By lack of reading comprehension you lose.
  
  As far as Buster Douglas goes again you use a winner take all 1 time meeting to try and prove your point when I already stated in a 1 game winner take all anything can happen.
  If Douglass and Tyson fought the best of 7 times the better fighter WOULD emerge.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  82>7>1.
• hoops23

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: 82>7>1.

  Sadly, you can't win a title during that 82 game scenario.
  
  therefore, 7>1>82...
  
  In my humble opinion, of course.
• Skyhook79

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: 82>7>1.

  
  LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• jpake1

  

  LTrain23 wrote:

  SQ_Crazies wrote: 82>7>1.

  Sadly, you can't win a title during that 82 game scenario.
  
  therefore, 7>1>82...
  
  In my humble opinion, of course.

  EXACTLY. 82 games is a lot of games. A championship is not won during that time. Teams know that, hence they save themselves a bit more. And once again, honestly? The Cavs had a better record by what, a game or two? For sure that makes them the best team; no questions asked, they simply blew it. The only thing bigger than 82 games, is the extra 20 or so playoff games the championship team ends up playing. So let's put it this way, 100>82.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  jpake1 wrote:

  LTrain23 wrote:

  SQ_Crazies wrote: 82>7>1.

  Sadly, you can't win a title during that 82 game scenario.
  
  therefore, 7>1>82...
  
  In my humble opinion, of course.

  EXACTLY. 82 games is a lot of games. A championship is not won during that time. Teams know that, hence they save themselves a bit more. And once again, honestly? The Cavs had a better record by what, a game or two? For sure that makes them the best team; no questions asked, they simply blew it. The only thing bigger than 82 games, is the extra 20 or so playoff games the championship team ends up playing. So let's put it this way, 100>82.

  to be fair though, by winning in those 82 games it helps your advantage in the playoffs to win it all by getting homecourt advantage and overall team chemistry
• jpake1

  

  Ya think?