« The Honor of McCain | Main | The Kids Love Him » The Odds on Chicago17 Apr 2007 11:06 am In terms of my prediction that the Bulls will be in the NBA Finals, it's important to distinguish between two claims:
Comments (45)
"The Bulls are more likely to win the Eastern Conference Championship than are any other team." To cut 'n' paste from the other thread: I'd say fair value is something around: 45 Detroit "I don't think the Bulls are enormously worse than either of those teams." That's where you go astray. 
"I do think the Bulls are enormously more likely to play in the championship game than are either Miami or Detroit, who have to play each other in a second-round tossup." Think of it this way: If one were to stipulate that Chicago has a 66% chance of beating Toronto and a 33% chance of beating Detroit/Miami, their odds of winning the East are only 21%.
Let me anally note that the NBA title is decided in the "NBA finals," not the "championship game." I know, it's MY's blog, and we all know about the typos, but this is basketblogging, for crying out loud! For the love of Jeff Ruland! And now I'm confused. One can argue that the Bulls are "enormously more likely" to get to the Eastern conference finals than either Miami or Detroit because they don't have to face either of those teams before that round. But what does that have to do with whether the Bulls are more likely to reach the NBA finals?
Bulls haven't sewn up the #2 spot. King James could still lay claim to that if all goes well. Where's Dick Bavetta reffing these last few games?
That's where you go astray. Are you kidding? The Bulls are enormously worse than the Heat? Did you watch last year's series? The Bulls are better than they were last year and the Heat are worse. The Bulls gave them a run for their money last year. I don't see how anyone could view the Bulls as being enormously worse than the Heat.
"And now I'm confused. One can argue that the Bulls are "enormously more likely" to get to the Eastern conference finals than either Miami or Detroit because they don't have to face either of those teams before that round. But what does that have to do with whether the Bulls are more likely to reach the NBA finals?" If one were to stipulate that the Bulls had a 45% chance of beating Detroit/Miami, that Chicago had an 85% chance of beating Toronto, and that a Detroit vs Miami series was an even matchup, then Chicago would indeed be the most likely team to win the East. But I don't see the above stipulation as being correct, so I think Detroit is clearly the most likely team to win the East.
Ed's right, I hadn't realized that the seedings are still fluid. Cavs play at Philly tonight and at home to Milwaukee tomorrow, Bulls play at New Jersey tomorrow. If Cleveland wins both and the Bulls lose, then Cleveland get the 2 seed, and Chicago drops to having to get through both Miami and Detroit just to reach the conference finals. I think Chicago will probably hang on to the 2 seed, but it's obviously very possible for Cleveland to pass them.
If one were to stipulate that Chicago has a 66% chance of beating Toronto... That's the number that MY is having trouble taking into account. Chicago's edge over Toronto is simply not that much larger than Detroit's edge over the Miami/Cleveland winner. Heck, even if you think Detroit is a toss-up in that series, that means Chicago is 66% to play in the Eastern Finals and Detroit is 50%, which is hardly an "enormous" edge for Chicago. In fact, it would mean Chicago is 4/3 as likely as Detroit to play in the Eastern Finals; so as long as you believe Detroit is more than a 4:3 favorite over Chicago, Detroit would be the favorite to advance to the Finals. In order to agree with MY's claim that Chicago is enormously more likely than either Miami or Detroit to play in the Eastern Finals, you basically have to assume Toronto has no shot in the 2nd round. In reality, Petey's assumption of 66% probably significantly overstates Chicago's edge over Toronto, which I would call 55-45 at best, but I think he's doing it just to be generous to MY's argument.
Let me anally note that the NBA title is decided in the "NBA finals," not the "championship game." I know, it's MY's blog, and we all know about the typos, but this is basketblogging, for crying out loud! For the love of Jeff Ruland! Heeee. FYI, Ruland was fired a couple of weeks ago.
Lemme see what happens if I try some explicit calculations. Chicago's odds of getting to the second round = 100 percent. Beating Toronto in round 2 = 80 percent. Beating Detroit/Miami = 40 percent. Resulting odds: 32 percent. For Detroit, it's 100, 50, 60. Resulting odds: 30 percent. The math makes this look closer than I would have guessed, and my pro-Chicago conclusion is now very vulnerable to slight tweaks in assumptions. If I give Detroit a 55 percent chance instead of a 50 percent chance against Miami, then the Pistons come out on top. How confident am I that 50 is right instead of 55? Not very.
FYI, Ruland was fired a couple of weeks ago. Yeah...actually, is this a good time to request a Tommy Thompson/Michael Ray Richardson compare-and-contrast post?
Matt, how can you give Chicago anything like an 80% chance to beat Toronto? They're a game-and-a-half apart in the standings!
Chicago over Toronto 80% likely? That seems awfully high. As Petey says, even if you give Chicago 66% odds in that series, your calculations go the other way. 66% followed by 40% comes out to 27%.
Did you ever think of submitting your sports posts to Ballhype.com? It's a kind of social networking/ranking system for blog posts on sports.
"Beating Toronto in round 2 = 80 percent. Beating Detroit/Miami = 40 percent." Both significantly too high. I'd say more like 65/25, give or take a bit.
Matt, how can you give Chicago anything like an 80% chance to beat Toronto? They're a game-and-a-half apart in the standings! Toronto plays in the Atlantic Division. Worst division in basketball. Bulls have won 66% of their games in the second half and play in the best division in the Eastern Conference.
I think Matt's probably also looking at some sort of margin of victory based rating method. Chicago looks good in those - see Sagarin's predictor rating: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nba0607.htm
Note also that if Cleveland splits their games and the Bulls lose, the Bulls are the #2. Unless Toronto goes 2-0 over the next two games, in which case it's a 3 way tie and Cleveland wins that, so they're the #2 and Chicago the #5. So: Bulls win -> Bulls #2.
Re Chicago versus Toronto: I was trying to think out loud with some specific numbers. 80-20 does seem too favorable to Chicago. I do think this is a favorable matchup for the Bulls, since I think they're well-equipped to contain Bosh, but it's more like 70/30 in which case it's hard to see any plausible way to reach my pro-Bulls conclusion.
"I think Matt's probably also looking at some sort of margin of victory based rating method. Chicago looks good in those" As does San Antonio. I think margin of victory does give you some information, but Matthew has always seriously overvalued it as an indicator.
Like I said in the other thread, I think road record is a better regular season separator of contenders from pretenders than most other things. I certainly think it tells you more than margin of victory. The odds of the Bulls suddenly making a regular-season-to-playoffs leap in becoming as good a road team as Detroit seem considerably less to me than the odds that the Pistons will perform at least as well at home in the playoffs as Chicago.
As do the Rockets, against marginally better competition.
Also, the Bulls have no chance of beating the Pistons. Height, it turns out, is a pretty important in basketball.
"Height, it turns out, is a pretty important in basketball." Well, then, maybe you'd care to explain how Vern Troyer was able to average 17 PPG playing college basketball?
Why is everyone so sure the Bulls lose straight up to Miami or Detroit? By what evidence? The Bulls absolutely destroyed both teams once on the road. That in and of itself doesn't make them the favorites, but it clearly indicates that they are totally capable of beating them. And I for one am by no means sure that Wade is healthy. Why would he be talking publicly about using an acupuncturist if everything was right with that shoulder?-
"That in and of itself doesn't make them the favorites, but it clearly indicates that they are totally capable of beating them." Sure. And NJ is capable of beating Chicago in the first round. We're discussing the odds of such a thing actually taking place.
Chicago... versus Detroit: versus Miami: I'm not suggesting that regular season success is a perfect barometer for postseason success, but come on. "The Bulls have no chance of beating the Pistons"?
off-topic, but Stern just suspended Joey Crawford indefinitely in response to the Duncan ejection. he's chatting about it on espn.com right now. good move by the commish, I say.
"Stern just suspended Joey Crawford indefinitely in response to the Duncan ejection." Wow. Makes sense, but I hope it's just a few games. Bring him back for the playoffs.
"Makes sense, but I hope it's just a few games. Bring him back for the playoffs." Never mind. He's done for the playoffs.
I think this type of worse team with an easier path makes a great deal more sense in either hockey or NCAA tourney where there is a greater chance of worse then average seeds winnings the whole. In this case the first round is a bit of gimme for all the teams.
I kind of like the fact that not much is expected of the imperious cavs and our king. Wait and watch!
with crawford out, the probability of spurs global dominance has tripled. and now on to destroying the only nba team with the word "powder" in its nickname.
"and now on to destroying the only nba team with the word "powder" in its nickname." Man, I really think the Powder Blues have a genuine shot at destroying the San Antonio death star. I wouldn't bet on them at even money odds, but I think they've got a genuine shot nonetheless... Use the force, Bubbachuck!
I think we haven't been giving enough love to Stern for taking a stand against one of his refs. We've pretty much come to a point where refs are defended at all costs by the announcers and the leagues, so it's good to see that Stern didn't have the knee-jerk "defend the ref" reaction that I expected. kc, after writing that post how could he possibly be short on adulation?
Regarding the Bulls vs. Detroit and Miami, I think that perceptions are colored by the fact that this Chicago team has not done anything in the playoffs before. But every team that breaks through has to start somewhere, right? I mean, remember when Detroit just crushed the Lakers, contrary to every expectation? So, based on the quality of their regular season numbers and their performance against both teams this year, I think it's fair to think that, barring a return to form from Dwayne Wade, the Bulls have a pretty reasonable chance of beating whatever team they face if they reach the ECF.
I mean, remember when Detroit just crushed the Lakers, contrary to every expectation? But that Detroit team had some experience. They had been in the Eastern Finals the year before, the 2nd round the year before that. It was a normal sort of progression. The previous Detroit championship team, the Bad Boys, exemplified that even better, losing the Eastern Finals in 7 and then the NBA Finals in 7 right before they won 2 straight titles. This is the standard pattern. It's considerably more rare for a team to leap all the way from a couple of first-round losses all the way to the title, unless they pick up a superstar. Playoff experience counts.
So, based on the quality of their regular season numbers and their performance against both teams this year, I think it's fair to think that, barring a return to form from Dwayne Wade, the Bulls have a pretty reasonable chance of beating whatever team they face if they reach the ECF. I can't stress this enough: Where's the beef? (i.e., the marketable appeal?) 'Cause David "Mr." Stern is nobody's fool.
You know, if the Cavs win tonight and tomorrow night and if the Bulls lose to the Nets (at New Jersey, but still an unlikely scenario, I know), then the Bulls have the 5th seed. And the Cavs have a fairly easy ride to the Conference Finals. Just saying.
What's the difference between true everlasting love and the NBA playoffs? The NBA playoffs last forever.
I can't believe this many people commented on this thread. Who even watches the NBA anymore? I don't even know which satellite channel carries its games. Basketball and hockey both have too-long seasons full of meaningless games followed by playoffs with interminable 7-game series -- designed to wring the maximum dollar from gate receipts. The one advantage hockey has is the threat of getting leveled by a hard check, which keeps players from completely mailing it in during the regular season. Football is the complete opposite, with more riding on most regular season games than on a typical NBA playoff game. The only sports event this spring that I am looking forward to is De La Hoya v. Mayweather. If they were naturally the same size, Mayweather would be a lock, since he is clearly the best pound-for-pound fighter in the game. That he has to come up so far in weight is the only thing that makes this competitive at all. Should be interesting -- a lot more interesting than listening to sneakers squeak on a shellacked floor for seven games.
Oops.
"Oops." Cleveland is the new Chicago.
With all due respect Petey, I had rather be LBJ with cavs at 5 than Bulls with an ensemble that never delivers, when pushed, on 2. Got the best of both worlds. Just wish that one of these days Matthew gets his predictions right. They have a law on that I guess. Something to do with averages. We shall all be witnesses. :)
Comments closed May 01, 2007. |
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email Books by Matthew Yglesias
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Weekly Archives
Categories
|
Copyright © 2007 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Heads in the Sand
I do think the Bulls are enormously more likely to play in the championship game than are either Miami or Detroit, who have to play each other in a second-round tossup.
So you don't think Chicago will win the conference finall--who cares beyond that? What's the value in knowing that Chicago is more likely to win the conference than a specific team if you believe Chicago is more likely to lose the final to its eventual opponent?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | April 17, 2007 12:32 PM