My God man. Why partiscipate in some good old fashion predictions when you can sit back and make fun of everyones prediction as if you are better than thou??? Come on man.
Look up the definition "often"... You essentially said predictions are wrong more than they are right. That's false.
and Vegas loses more than they win then? Heck, Vegas often gives odds where they pay out more than the cost of the bet if the patron wins and Vegas still comes out ahead in the end. Otherwise they wouldn't be in business. Now neither one of us knows whether it's 50/50. 75/25 or 25/75 or any other percentage in favor of the predictor so maybe it's best just to leave it as we agree to disagree rather than turn this into an argument and muck up another thread. Fair enough?
Just so you have something concrete to look at. Go back and look at the poll in the Game 1 thread. A total of 4 people on that poll voted that the Pels would win the series. None of them had it in a sweep. You actually voted the Blazers would win in 6 games...... I also was wrong as i voted Blazers in 7. My writeup however was pretty much exactly the way things came out. Lillard was locked down and the wings did not hit a shot. Mirotic was a huge advantage for the Pels in their starting unit. Your closest thing to a proposed offensive style of play before the game was having Nurk post up Davis and try to get him in foul trouble. Stotts pretty much tried this and of course we watched what happened. Davis was way to fast. Then Stotts had to pretty much take Nurk out when he got into foul trouble himself. This is your quote- "Nurk is going to post up AD and try to get him into foul trouble. AD as the primary rim protector in the starting lineup instead of being a weakside shot blocker puts him at more risk for foul trouble because Nurk will attack him and he'll have to protect the rim against Lillard and McCollum drives. Nurk is deceptively agile. He's not the slug you think he is. If I'm Portland, I'm fine with Anthony Davis trying to beat us with long 2-point jumpers. That's the least productive shot in the game and it's much better than any other shot Davis can get. So press Davis at the 3point line, dig if he drives, and if he's around 16-19 feet, sag. Nurk can do that." You didn't really account for double and triple teaming of Damian Lillard drives. Davis didn't really have to protect against that at all. The point is predictions have a tendency to be fan driven and very "Emotional" in their belief that the team can somehow do what it takes to win. Or there are the Negs that always predict failure so they can boast that they were right about the failure when it occurs. Vegas knows this. They make an awful lot of money because of it.
This argument is already silly. The way Utah plays would be better suited against New Orleans than our style of play.. That's what started this, and it turned into you saying something about predictions being often wrong...
I didn't account for us not being able to adjust or exploit a sellout drmefensive scheme. I expected Terry to be better than he was... Yes, there's biased predictions.. sometimes predictions are wrong. Your point?
of course, you're the victim and I'm the instigator in your mind. You certainly play that card often enough. I am now done with this conversation with you. Enjoy your day.
I'm literally just stating how the conversation steered off-topic. I'm not even implying that you instigating anything, just that your statement about predictions being often wrong steered the conversation off-topic. What a weird response.
Lets all just hope in the end Paul George does indeed walk and the Thunder are stuck with Melo and Russ. Then by some crazy weird chance the Stars align with mars and the moon moves into the seventh house and the Blazers end up with George.
If you look at the game one thread 68 people voted on the series. Every one of them were wrong. 100% Only 4 of 64 even said the Pelicans would win. @bodyman5000 and 1 @Hoopguru & @Nikolokolus had the Pels in 7... @deiondeion had the Pelicans in 6. So pretty much in this case often only really applies to being wrong on the predictions. Predicting what will happen in the outcome of a game or series is for the most part luck. You know i have done pregames for years. I have been wrong an awful lot of times. But there is that gleaming time every now and again that i can actually get one right. Kind of like that great golf drive when you leave it right next to the cup. Keeps ya coming back. http://www.sportstwo.com/threads/pl...2018-saturday-7-30-pm-pdt-espn-nbcsnw.329587/
I unfortunately knew they would lose. I was going to go bet against them but decided not to. Didn't wanna jinxspeed them. I picked 7 games because that would be the most upsetting. A sweep sucks but losing at home in game 7 would be traumatic.
There are just so many examples with Vegas being the best one and your link to the prediction thread as well. In the end, it really isn't even a big deal as it's for the most part it is all for fun unless one lays down a chunk of money and loses. We have all been wrong one time or another and probably more often than not.
So the Pacers wanted CJ in the trade for Paul George? If he stays with the Thunder can we say we blew that one because we where afraid of the one and done rental? I hope he does stay. How about Kawhi Leonard?
#FakeNews The Blazers weren't even mentioned in that video, let alone anything about the Pacers wanting C.J. Stop making shit up an acting like it actually happened. Who do you think you are, the president? BNM
Why are you participating in the madness? Predictions are effing predictions because we can't see the future. Vegas is making predictions, we are making predictions. Educated predictions are better than uneducated predictions...sometimes (see march madness brackets). Some predictions are good, some bad. For most every result there have been predictions predicting it, AND that is half of what we are doing in here! Can we not predict how Utah would've done against New Orleans because we were wrong about the Blazers series? That's silly. Maybe we learned from our series and the Golden State series what it would look like. In our series, I personally thought Stotts would counterpunch and he didn't. Who'd have predicted that? Answer: someone. Vegas makes money. But their odds serve other purposes, no? They want to encourage betting so they'll set the line to do so. We are predicting for sake of trying to be right. Sure, we're biased at times. But these are essentially intellectual exercises. To make a prediction while balancing your biases is to put yourself on the line. And sometimes you lose with the team. It sucks but it certainly a big portion of what it's all about for many of us. My point is it's much easier to say "you can't predict the future" and all that kind of smugfuckery, then to take your knowledge and do your best to predict the future.
https://www.kgw.com/mobile/article/...zers-offer-for-paul-george-revealed/453758858 The Portland Trail Blazers offered all three first-round draft picks and any player from their roster other than Damian Lillard, CJ McCollum or Jusuf Nurkic to the Indiana Pacers for star forward Paul George, according to a report.
