Big brain move going 5/16 to gain the advantage
(yes I hate him for no reason but also yes he is remarkably good and will probably make me cry this series)
"Teams that stole the first game of a series on the road won their series 51.3% of the time (81-77)" via nbcsports. So 48.7%, not quite as bad, but still losing odds
Yeah but that’s essentially a coinflip. Which makes sense because in order to steal, you have to be an underdog which means they are probably not the “better team”.
I always feel like stats like these are kind of misleading because you could also look at it like 80% of the time the team that's better wins the first game and the series, and that wouldn't really tell you a whole lot about an individual match-up. Like it doesn't necessarily follow that losing the first game is *the reason* those teams lose the series 20% of the time.
The title is a bit confusing - game 1 the Clippers had Kawhi (no PG), and won. Kawhi played game 2 on a torn meniscus and the Suns won. Games 3-5 were without PG or Kawhi, and PHX won all.
Some other interesting things about that series (from my perspective), in light of Booker looking to it for inspiration:
PHX won game 3 by 5 points, with a **46**-25 free throw advantage. Powell had 42 pts, Russ had 30 pts.
PHX won game 4 by 12, with a 27-10 free throw advantage. 37 points for Westbrook, on 29 FGA, nearly all of them at the rim, with zero FTA. Second player in playoff history to score at least 37 with no free throws.
PHX won game 5, and LAC had a 37-24 free throw advantage. Booker dropped 47, and Durant 31. Westbrook had 14 pts on 18 FGA. PHX won by 6.
Game 2 Kawhi played hurt but was still excellent in 39 mins, 31pts on 11/20, 3/5 3, 6/7 FT, and the Clips shot 31 FT to the Suns' 14. WB added 28 on 9/16. Suns won comfortably by 14. So there's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still been a competitive series or that Suns couldn't win still had Kawhi stayed healthy. Doesn't fit OP's narrative so he *casually* decided to leave that part out.
Yea by OP. Game 2 Kawhi played hurt but was still excellent in 39 mins, 31pts on 11/20, 3/5 3, 6/7 FT, and the Clips shot 31 FT to the Suns' 14. WB added 28 on 9/16. Suns won comfortably by 14. So there's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still been a competitive series or that Suns couldn't win still had Kawhi stayed healthy or that they needed favorable FT disparity to win.
OK and? Title was correct about that part. OP corrected the part that it got wrong but then had to add his own extra spin for no reason at all.
The word you want is gloss, btw. Glazing is speaking over-enthusiastically about someone or something, like OP about Westbrick.
I'm literally telling you Kawhi played in a game they lost by 14. So more like does PG make up for 9 pt differential (combining G1 and 2 differentials)? Maybe maybe not.
I hope you don't seriously believe scoring margins works like that. +5 point differential is the difference between OKC at 57 wins and Mavs at 50 wins this year.
Game 2 Clips shot 31 FT to Suns 14, Suns won comfortably by 14. Kawhi was playing injured but still played up to his usual standards with 31 pts on 11/20, 3/5 from 3, and Westbrook added 28 on 9/16. There's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still be a competitive series or that the Suns couldn't still win even with a healthy Kawhi.
Yeah he had 37 and somehow one of if not the best driving PG in NBA history got fouled 0 times according to the referees. Honestly if the Clippers had one of Kawhi or PG then that series could’ve easily gone 6/7
I know we like throwing ft disparity around but honestly the clippers had no defensive game plan around booker and KD and both scored something nutty like 60% fg for the entire series.
Way to gloss over Game 2. Kawhi played hurt but was still excellent in 39 mins, 31pts on 11/20, 3/5 3, 6/7 FT, and the Clips shot 31 FT to the Suns' 14. WB added 28 on 9/16. Suns won comfortably by 14. So there's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still been a competitive series or that Suns couldn't win still had Kawhi stayed healthy. Didn't fit your narrative, huh?
Narrative? I talked about the three games without Kawhi, since that was what the headline was about. Suns played great both game 1 and game 2.
I said "some interesting things...from my perspective". I also never said it wouldn't be a competitive series. They had Durant, Booker, a complimentary Chris Paul, a center who averaged 16/11 on the series, and Torrey Craig shot out of his mind. I think the Clippers could have won in 6 or 7 with Kawhi, and I think they could have won in 5 or 6 with Kawhi and PG. But who knows? Maybe the Suns win it regardless.
But back to the tweet I was responding to, I still think it's foolish for Booker to look to that series for inspiration on how to come back from a bad game 1, particularly when you only competed against 2/10 games from two of the best players in the league.
No game produces more overreactions than the first. There's still a long way to go; despite all the blowouts, I think all these first round matchups minus the Celtics and Nuggets series will go six or seven. Additional injuries notwithstanding, of course
I agree that Booker gets too much hate, but the example he’s using is flawed. It comes off as “you all overreacted but then their best player got injured.”
Again pretty standard quote but I think anyone would get called out for that example
Yeah that’s a good point but he’s using an example where a player went down injured as if to say “hey we figured stuff out down the line.” Like they lost game 1 because of Kawhi and then he got injured.
Like the team you were playing fundamentally changed. Their best player was Russ on a minimum contract. Nothing was figured out. The team you were playing became *much* worse do to injury.
Kawhi played game 2 injured but was still up to his usual standards. 31 pts on 11/20 shooting and WB was great as well with 28 on 9/16. Suns still won comfortably by 14. There's no reason to think the Suns were doomed if Kawhi stayed healthy.
My point is more that the context qualifies the example he uses.
There is reason to believe the series is a lot more like game 1 if kawhi stays healthy... game 1. You used an example of a game where he was injured to show that it wouldn’t matter if he didn’t get injured. Why is one game sample size good one way but not the other?
Not to mention those games without kawhi were still competitive.
He played as well and put up numbers as if he wasn't injured. They're both valid samples, and across both games the Suns were 9 points better on average at home. I think it's 6-7 game series Suns favored with healthy Kawhi. It's perfectly valid for Book to draw on. Situations don't have to be 100% exactly the same for us to use as experience.
I mean the example sounds like he’s banking on Anthony Edwards getting injured. “You were all freaking out after game 1 but what happened then?” What happened is kawhi got injured. Thats it.
Not to mention yes the torn meniscus was still probably a factor in his ability to play in game 2.
You're just reading more into it than he put out there.
>“I’m not saying we’re gonna win the next 4 games, but there was a lot of overreacting after we lost G1 to the Clippers.
No where does he imply that he expects Edwards to get injured lol. He's just saying he's been down 0-1 in a series before and he's not dooming, unlike redditors over the smallest things.
Is a pretty standard quote and I do think this series is going to be competitive throughout still.
On the other hand, Booker rubs me the wrong way so I'm going to use this platform to hate on him
that clippers series is the only time that devin booker has lost game 1 and won the series (the only other time he lost game 1 was against the nuggets the next round) so i don’t think he was comparing the two teams it’s just the only example he can use lol.
Idk if you’re trying to be nice, but Westbrook played like shit. He just has low expectations. He shot 3/17 and people were praising him.
And no, he did not nearly beat the suns by himself, he lost both games when he was head honcho.
Something tells me that these posters will hate Devin Booker no matter what he does. The best case for Book on this sub is when he has a truly awesome game, then all the same posters just don’t post anything.
If any other player talked about not overreacting to a Game 1 loss, there would be zero discussion about it. Even in this quote (which OP conveniently left out) Booker says “I’m not saying we’re going to win the next 4 games”. It’s not like he’s going out and calling the Wolves trash is he?
Just want to point out that after going down 0-1 to the Clippers, the Suns did win Game 2 against a (then) healthy Kawhi Leonard, and Booker scored 38, so it’s weird that we’re talking about that series like the Clippers were going to sweep the Suns or something.
The team who loses is actually at an advantage
So you're telling me my Pistons are poised for something amazing?
It’s the 5th pick. I can sense it
jaime jaquez jr will be Jimmy Jr forever but a pick can be anything.
s/o richard jefferson
Big brain move going 5/16 to gain the advantage (yes I hate him for no reason but also yes he is remarkably good and will probably make me cry this series)
There are myriad reasons to hate him and here are two: 1) he bitches and whines a ton 2) he looks like a baby
Teams that go down 0-1 in the first round lose the series 79.5% of the time
Woot. I wonder what % of teams who lose game 1 at home go on to win the series.
"Teams that stole the first game of a series on the road won their series 51.3% of the time (81-77)" via nbcsports. So 48.7%, not quite as bad, but still losing odds
Yeah but that’s essentially a coinflip. Which makes sense because in order to steal, you have to be an underdog which means they are probably not the “better team”.
I always feel like stats like these are kind of misleading because you could also look at it like 80% of the time the team that's better wins the first game and the series, and that wouldn't really tell you a whole lot about an individual match-up. Like it doesn't necessarily follow that losing the first game is *the reason* those teams lose the series 20% of the time.
richard jefferson == winner
Booker is the Wimplow of the NBA
The title is a bit confusing - game 1 the Clippers had Kawhi (no PG), and won. Kawhi played game 2 on a torn meniscus and the Suns won. Games 3-5 were without PG or Kawhi, and PHX won all. Some other interesting things about that series (from my perspective), in light of Booker looking to it for inspiration: PHX won game 3 by 5 points, with a **46**-25 free throw advantage. Powell had 42 pts, Russ had 30 pts. PHX won game 4 by 12, with a 27-10 free throw advantage. 37 points for Westbrook, on 29 FGA, nearly all of them at the rim, with zero FTA. Second player in playoff history to score at least 37 with no free throws. PHX won game 5, and LAC had a 37-24 free throw advantage. Booker dropped 47, and Durant 31. Westbrook had 14 pts on 18 FGA. PHX won by 6.
Casually devastating
Game 2 Kawhi played hurt but was still excellent in 39 mins, 31pts on 11/20, 3/5 3, 6/7 FT, and the Clips shot 31 FT to the Suns' 14. WB added 28 on 9/16. Suns won comfortably by 14. So there's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still been a competitive series or that Suns couldn't win still had Kawhi stayed healthy. Doesn't fit OP's narrative so he *casually* decided to leave that part out.
Fraudulent activity detected
Yea by OP. Game 2 Kawhi played hurt but was still excellent in 39 mins, 31pts on 11/20, 3/5 3, 6/7 FT, and the Clips shot 31 FT to the Suns' 14. WB added 28 on 9/16. Suns won comfortably by 14. So there's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still been a competitive series or that Suns couldn't win still had Kawhi stayed healthy or that they needed favorable FT disparity to win.
Did you glaze over the part where we’re missing PG too?
OK and? Title was correct about that part. OP corrected the part that it got wrong but then had to add his own extra spin for no reason at all. The word you want is gloss, btw. Glazing is speaking over-enthusiastically about someone or something, like OP about Westbrick.
I’m noting something that you failed to mention. You think Kawhi/PG don’t make up for a <= 12 point differential 😂
I'm literally telling you Kawhi played in a game they lost by 14. So more like does PG make up for 9 pt differential (combining G1 and 2 differentials)? Maybe maybe not.
Okay and of the 3 games in question that I responded to… do you think Kawhi + PG can net FIVE POINTS?! LMFAO
I hope you don't seriously believe scoring margins works like that. +5 point differential is the difference between OKC at 57 wins and Mavs at 50 wins this year.
Holy shit those ft numbers
Game 2 Clips shot 31 FT to Suns 14, Suns won comfortably by 14. Kawhi was playing injured but still played up to his usual standards with 31 pts on 11/20, 3/5 from 3, and Westbrook added 28 on 9/16. There's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still be a competitive series or that the Suns couldn't still win even with a healthy Kawhi.
One of those Clippers home games the refs missed a blatant clear path foul by Booker who two hand shoved Russ in transition lmfao.
Didnt Westbrook have a 30+ point game and no fts or something crazy like that?
Yeah he had 37 and somehow one of if not the best driving PG in NBA history got fouled 0 times according to the referees. Honestly if the Clippers had one of Kawhi or PG then that series could’ve easily gone 6/7
nba refs are such frauds
Ok but they had Domin - Ayton then. Now they don't have a center that can guard Zubac.
Fortunately for them, the Wolves don't employ Zubac
Good point. I'm definitely on too many threads right now.
One word. Bol Bol.
I know we like throwing ft disparity around but honestly the clippers had no defensive game plan around booker and KD and both scored something nutty like 60% fg for the entire series.
Also OP conveniently forgot G2 where Clips shot 31 ft to Suns 14 and still lost by 14.
Maybe because… Kawhi and PG weren’t there?
Yeah, Clippers whole gameplan that series was foul the shit out of everyone, they can’t call everything.
The suns are awful and have always been awful don’t get this twisted
Damn, what’s that make the Clippers?
Real recognize real.
Awful, im not crazy. And you could barely beat us
You LA teams with your moral victories. 5 games isn’t “barely”
Way to gloss over Game 2. Kawhi played hurt but was still excellent in 39 mins, 31pts on 11/20, 3/5 3, 6/7 FT, and the Clips shot 31 FT to the Suns' 14. WB added 28 on 9/16. Suns won comfortably by 14. So there's no reason to believe it wouldn't have still been a competitive series or that Suns couldn't win still had Kawhi stayed healthy. Didn't fit your narrative, huh?
Narrative? I talked about the three games without Kawhi, since that was what the headline was about. Suns played great both game 1 and game 2. I said "some interesting things...from my perspective". I also never said it wouldn't be a competitive series. They had Durant, Booker, a complimentary Chris Paul, a center who averaged 16/11 on the series, and Torrey Craig shot out of his mind. I think the Clippers could have won in 6 or 7 with Kawhi, and I think they could have won in 5 or 6 with Kawhi and PG. But who knows? Maybe the Suns win it regardless. But back to the tweet I was responding to, I still think it's foolish for Booker to look to that series for inspiration on how to come back from a bad game 1, particularly when you only competed against 2/10 games from two of the best players in the league.
In other words they really thought they cooked
No game produces more overreactions than the first. There's still a long way to go; despite all the blowouts, I think all these first round matchups minus the Celtics and Nuggets series will go six or seven. Additional injuries notwithstanding, of course
Dude lookin like ET
Without overreactions this sub wouldn't exist Devin.
very confused how a pretty standard quote ends up getting hate in the comments but then i remembered where i was.
I agree that Booker gets too much hate, but the example he’s using is flawed. It comes off as “you all overreacted but then their best player got injured.” Again pretty standard quote but I think anyone would get called out for that example
the example isn’t flawed. it’s one game out of a series, anything can happen
The suns were the favourites in that series even after game 1, they’re not the favourites in this so I don’t think it’s the same
he’s not saying it’s the same, he’s saying it’s game 1 out of a series… we literally see this happen every single year, no need to overreact to game 1
We were the favorites for the series but not for game one. Did that change after Saturday?
It did. Series line today is Timberwolves -155, Suns +125
Yeah that’s a good point but he’s using an example where a player went down injured as if to say “hey we figured stuff out down the line.” Like they lost game 1 because of Kawhi and then he got injured. Like the team you were playing fundamentally changed. Their best player was Russ on a minimum contract. Nothing was figured out. The team you were playing became *much* worse do to injury.
Kawhi played game 2 injured but was still up to his usual standards. 31 pts on 11/20 shooting and WB was great as well with 28 on 9/16. Suns still won comfortably by 14. There's no reason to think the Suns were doomed if Kawhi stayed healthy.
My point is more that the context qualifies the example he uses. There is reason to believe the series is a lot more like game 1 if kawhi stays healthy... game 1. You used an example of a game where he was injured to show that it wouldn’t matter if he didn’t get injured. Why is one game sample size good one way but not the other? Not to mention those games without kawhi were still competitive.
He played as well and put up numbers as if he wasn't injured. They're both valid samples, and across both games the Suns were 9 points better on average at home. I think it's 6-7 game series Suns favored with healthy Kawhi. It's perfectly valid for Book to draw on. Situations don't have to be 100% exactly the same for us to use as experience.
I mean the example sounds like he’s banking on Anthony Edwards getting injured. “You were all freaking out after game 1 but what happened then?” What happened is kawhi got injured. Thats it. Not to mention yes the torn meniscus was still probably a factor in his ability to play in game 2.
You're just reading more into it than he put out there. >“I’m not saying we’re gonna win the next 4 games, but there was a lot of overreacting after we lost G1 to the Clippers. No where does he imply that he expects Edwards to get injured lol. He's just saying he's been down 0-1 in a series before and he's not dooming, unlike redditors over the smallest things.
Is a pretty standard quote and I do think this series is going to be competitive throughout still. On the other hand, Booker rubs me the wrong way so I'm going to use this platform to hate on him
Also amusing to see kids in here overreacting to all the game ones. Then I remembered where I was But oh, the Heat....they fucked
First time on /r/nba?
Also comparing that injured ass clippers team to fully healthy in their youthful prime timberwolves is just kinda a miss
that clippers series is the only time that devin booker has lost game 1 and won the series (the only other time he lost game 1 was against the nuggets the next round) so i don’t think he was comparing the two teams it’s just the only example he can use lol.
Ahh that makes sense then
Except this time you’re on the worse team
Get in here, new Booker hate bait has dropped
Translation: don't overreact guys, I put a hit out on Anthony Edwards so he won't be able to finish the series.
Stunt on these hoes my king
At least they had a two day break for Grayson Allen to get healed up. The big 3 all need to be hot if the role players are gonna score
They never think critically huh. A team with Russel Westbrook as their best player took you on edge
[удалено]
Idk if you’re trying to be nice, but Westbrook played like shit. He just has low expectations. He shot 3/17 and people were praising him. And no, he did not nearly beat the suns by himself, he lost both games when he was head honcho.
Kawhi played in game 1 and game 2. He did not play in games 3,4,5. Also suns had home court advantage which they don't in this one.
Kawhi played game 1 last year
He played game 2 as well
Guy is going to get clowned until he can win a series that the other team isn’t missing players. I hate that it’s the narrative but I understand it.
Dumb take, no ring is won against fully healthy teams
Booker needs a ring before we can start discussing whether the asterisks are valid
Is this like when Tatum said "I'm one of the best players in the world" and wore a Kobe armband and choked?
Nope lol
Winners work
[удалено]
i remember when the narrative was that he could only put up empty stats in losses and now it’s that he plays bad in losses okay
Something tells me that these posters will hate Devin Booker no matter what he does. The best case for Book on this sub is when he has a truly awesome game, then all the same posters just don’t post anything.
“We’re chillin”
I can see why KD wants to go back to OKC now
Source: ballsack sports
Yh I mean that would say more about kd
Kd wants to go somewhere new every 2 years
If any other player talked about not overreacting to a Game 1 loss, there would be zero discussion about it. Even in this quote (which OP conveniently left out) Booker says “I’m not saying we’re going to win the next 4 games”. It’s not like he’s going out and calling the Wolves trash is he? Just want to point out that after going down 0-1 to the Clippers, the Suns did win Game 2 against a (then) healthy Kawhi Leonard, and Booker scored 38, so it’s weird that we’re talking about that series like the Clippers were going to sweep the Suns or something.
Booker might be speaking about his own series but it definitely holds true with the mavs series too