sick of all you cheery fucking rainbows up in here. down 0-2 against a team we should be able to beat pretty easily (best matchup)....would be shit. still pissed that we pissed game 1 away. totally winable game. The playoffs are all about streaks at the moment. FOCUS! :MARIS61:
"cheery fucking rainbows" that is good stuff el jefe . . . and yes percentage of winning series after losing first two are very low.
I remember when we were down 0-2 to the Sixers in 1977. That turned out okay. We were down 0-3 to these Mavs in 2003 and would have won Game 7 if Pip wouldn't have gone down during the game. It ain't over 'till it's over; this Blazer team has shown us that countless times.
In theory, it isn't a "must win" game. In practice, going down 0-2 overwhelmingly stacks the deck in favor of the Mavs.
Portland needs to take one in Dallas. Doesn't matter when, so long as it happens before Dallas wins four home games. I just wanted a split of these first two games, but it's not disastrous if they don't win one of the two. Losing the first two games is disastrous for the home team, not the road team.
From 2008-2010, only 6 of 24 playoff teams have advanced to the second round after losing the first game. Hate to see the stats for losing the first two . . . hopefully won't have to look at that stat.
I'm thinking if the blazers go down 0-2...they'll just lay down the rest of the series...maybe win a game...but it seems par for the course for this team. just seen this scenario with the blazers so much.
But hey there is this: Here’s the interesting part: since 2000, only one team has lost its first game and then went on to win the NBA championship. That team? The Spurs, who did it in 2003, 2005, and 2007. That’s right, the same Spurs who dropped their first game this year to Memphis. Bad omen for the other teams looking for a title? Blazers are often compared to the Spurs (somehow) . . . maybe this is the start of the Blazer era a la Spurs of the 2000s . . .
