Game Thread GAME# 50: BLAZERS @ SUNS - JANUARY 24, 2019 - THURSDAY, 6:00 PM, NBCSNW

[kjironman1]

Games Above .500 = Wins - Losses
Games Below .500 = Losses - Wins

Different way of looking at the correct context - Games Above .500 references how many wins youd have to eliminate to get the record to .500.

In this case, we'd have to eliminate 10 of our wins. If we were 50-32, we'd have to eliminate 18 games.

Also at 50-32, we'd have to have won 9 less games and lost 9 more to be 41-41. (9+9=18).

At the end of the season a 500 team is still 41-41. 500 is never going to be 32 wins. Ever. Saying you are 18 games above 32 losses does not make it 18 games over 500. A fifty win team will have a .609 winning percentage. There is absolutely no question about that. By saying 9+9=18 is totally discounting that one less win is also one more loss. You guys can call it what you wish but these are facts and they are indisputable.

Also at 50-32, we'd have to have won 9 less games and lost 9 more to be 41-41. (9+9=18).

Winning 9 less games IS losing 9 more. You do not have to do both.

 

[RR7]

The above or below .500 is assuming one singular result. 1 win. 1 loss. not a subtracted win AND an added loss. 30-20 to 25-25 both adds 5 losses and subtracts 5 wins. It's strictly about a singular result, and how many of those singular results, at your CURRENT standing, will it take to get to .500. If I'm 2-0, it will take 2 results to get to .500. Yes, IF I had lost 1, I'd be .500, but then you're asking for time travel to change results. That's not how it works. Again, it's forward thinking. How many going forward to get to .500. It's irrelevant at the end of the year if there are no games left. It's simply a measure of how many singular events it would take to get to that percentage.
Otherwise, by your definition, each result only counts as half. If I'm 2-0, by your understanding, I'm 1 game above .500. And if I win 2 more, then I'm 2 games. Not how that works. At all. Never has. Never used that way. singular events to get to the percentage, how many will it take. It's not hypotheticals of IF I had lost half the games. It understands ever result, and then what it takes to get to .500.

 

[BonesJones]

At the end of the season a 500 team is still 41-41. 500 is never going to be 32 wins. Ever. Saying you are 18 games above 32 losses does not make it 18 games over 500. A fifty win team will have a .609 winning percentage. There is absolutely no question about that. By saying 9+9=18 is totally discounting that one less win is also one more loss. You guys can call it what you wish but these are facts and they are indisputable.

Winning 9 less games IS losing 9 more. You do not have to do both.

RR7 did a good job explaining what I was trying to above. You're wrong, and I can quote many top media sources if you want me to.

 

[kjironman1]

RR7 did a good job explaining what I was trying to above. You're wrong, and I can quote many top media sources if you want me to.

I totally agree. he did a great job in explaining everything we already know.
But still at the end of the season you are going to have to say a 41-41 team was a 500 team. The fact also is that at 30-20 they will need to lose 10 games to become a 500 team. That fact has never been disputed.
I'm going to sit back now and listen to what you all say when this team wins 46 or more games and you then try to tell people Stotts is only like 5 games from being a 500 coach.
You cannot have it both ways.

 

[BonesJones]

I totally agree. he did a great job in explaining everything we already know.
But still at the end of the season you are going to have to say a 41-41 team was a 500 team. The fact also is that at 30-20 they will need to lose 10 games to become a 500 team. That fact has never been disputed.
I'm going to sit back now and listen to what you all say when this team wins 46 or more games and you then try to tell people Stotts is only like 5 games from being a 500 coach.
You cannot have it both ways.

So because you're wrong you fabricated a completely made-up narrative to discredit others?

Not surprised.

 

[kjironman1]

So because you're wrong you fabricated a completely made-up narrative to discredit others?

Not surprised.

Wrong? There is no wrong here. I have been talking about winning percentages and games over 500 all along. A 500 team at the end of the season is 41-41. The way you perceive over 500 is with losses. So you have and will continue to count a 50 win team as 18 over 500. I'm good with that. All i'm saying is if Stotts happens to get this team to 50 wins he deserves the credit as you state it. I have never said you are wrong. they would indeed have to lose 10 games from this point to be a 500 team again. ( I would hope they won't)
If a team is 32-32 they would have to win 18 straight games to be a 50 win team. I have never said you are wrong at all.
I have just maintained that at the end of the season a 500 team is in fact 41-41. To me a 50 win team would be only 9 games better. If you feel that is wrong. So be it.

 

[BonesJones]

Wrong? There is no wrong here. I have been talking about winning percentages and games over 500 all along. A 500 team at the end of the season is 41-41. The way you perceive over 500 is with losses. So you have and will continue to count a 50 win team as 18 over 500. I'm good with that. All i'm saying is if Stotts happens to get this team to 50 wins he deserves the credit as you state it. I have never said you are wrong. they would indeed have to lose 10 games from this point to be a 500 team again. ( I would hope they won't)
If a team is 32-32 they would have to win 18 straight games to be a 50 win team. I have never said you are wrong at all.
I have just maintained that at the end of the season a 500 team is in fact 41-41. To me a 50 win team would be only 9 games better. If you feel that is wrong. So be it.

Alright, you can disagree with 99.9% of the sports world and sound strange when you say that 50-32 is "9 games above .500".

Winning 50 games doesnt mean I have to give him credit for anything. Nice change of subject though, I'll entertain it.

As I've said before, I think this is a very talented team. If we win 50 games, it's because of that, first and foremost.

2nd, I've also stated that Stotts weaknesses get exposed during playoffs, when teams ratchet up the pressure, to which Terry struggles to adjust against. Lack of ball movement, defensive versatility, productive sets, and inability to adjust to pressure defense has been my 4 biggest complaints this year. Teams dont exploit those weaknesses in the regular season like they do in the postseason.

Precedent - We won 49 games last year. Using your logic, we shouldve been kissing up to Terry right before he got exposed in a postseason sweep at the hands of a 6 seed (without its all-star center) who is 13th in the West right now.

Im tired of hearing how if something (anything) good happens, I "HAVE" to give Stotts credit. Im not sitting here saying you "HAVE" to complain about Stotts because we had 20 turnovers against OKC....

 

[bobf]

Jake's alley-oops make my nipples tingle.

"More Layman throw downs!!"
"Jake. Your highs are taking my higher."
"Jake with the throw down! The guy is willing himself into a starting job"
"Jake's alley-oops make my nipples tingle."

A strange thought came to my mind picturing all those Jake alley-oops. Imagine they played this every time Jake slams down another alley-oops.



I'm "not that serious" just a funny thought.

 

[bobf]

As far as the games above or below .500 goes. Both sides give a rational meaning to the phrase.
1. How many games would we have to win or lose to be at .500.
2. How many past games would have to be flipped to be at .500.

The latter makes sense but the former is simpler, doesn't get weird after an odd number of games, and has been adopted as the convention. There is no absolute right or wrong. But it's communication so you go with the flow.

 

[bobf]

Thanks to everyone who voted in the poll... no one voted for my man Al Farouq!

 

[blue9]

Thanks to everyone who voted in the poll... no one voted for my man Al Farouq!

He's expiring and only $7m. As much as I hate the guy, that would be one of the dumbest contracts to cut.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Wrong? There is no wrong here. I have been talking about winning percentages and games over 500 all along. A 500 team at the end of the season is 41-41. The way you perceive over 500 is with losses. So you have and will continue to count a 50 win team as 18 over 500. I'm good with that. All i'm saying is if Stotts happens to get this team to 50 wins he deserves the credit as you state it. I have never said you are wrong. they would indeed have to lose 10 games from this point to be a 500 team again. ( I would hope they won't)
If a team is 32-32 they would have to win 18 straight games to be a 50 win team. I have never said you are wrong at all.
I have just maintained that at the end of the season a 500 team is in fact 41-41. To me a 50 win team would be only 9 games better. If you feel that is wrong. So be it.

Wins v losses. Looking forward v looking back. Two different ways of looking at the math - but ultimately you wind up in the same place because there is only one set of facts.

I'm confused. Why is this worth fighting over??

 

[kjironman1]

Wins v losses. Looking forward v looking back. Two different ways of looking at the math - but ultimately you wind up in the same place because there is only one set of facts.

I'm confused. Why is this worth fighting over??

I agree wholeheartedly. Why was this an issue. I simply look at as winning percentage vs win over losses. Seemed to get a bit off track.

 

[kjironman1]

Alright, you can disagree with 99.9% of the sports world and sound strange when you say that 50-32 is "9 games above .500".

Winning 50 games doesnt mean I have to give him credit for anything. Nice change of subject though, I'll entertain it.

As I've said before, I think this is a very talented team. If we win 50 games, it's because of that, first and foremost.

2nd, I've also stated that Stotts weaknesses get exposed during playoffs, when teams ratchet up the pressure, to which Terry struggles to adjust against. Lack of ball movement, defensive versatility, productive sets, and inability to adjust to pressure defense has been my 4 biggest complaints this year. Teams dont exploit those weaknesses in the regular season like they do in the postseason.

Precedent - We won 49 games last year. Using your logic, we shouldve been kissing up to Terry right before he got exposed in a postseason sweep at the hands of a 6 seed (without its all-star center) who is 13th in the West right now.

Im tired of hearing how if something (anything) good happens, I "HAVE" to give Stotts credit. Im not sitting here saying you "HAVE" to complain about Stotts because we had 20 turnovers against OKC....

Thanks for allowing me to have my own opinion. Like i needed your approval. But i will give you credit for at least allowing someone on here to look at something the way they want to finally.

 

[DUB]

I'm confused. Why is this worth fighting over??

Because:

Although it's not strictly accurate, we all know they have no-one wanting them to come to bed.

 

[BonesJones]

Thanks for allowing me to have my own opinion. Like i needed your approval. But i will give you credit for at least allowing someone on here to look at something the way they want to finally.

All this coming from the guy who's telling me what my opinion has to be.

 

[kjironman1]

All this coming from the guy who's telling me what my opinion has to be.

Excuse me? Come again?

 

[SIeepwalker]

To the people still arguing about this games over .500 shit

Shut the fuck up clap clap clapclapclap

 

[SIeepwalker]

Wins v losses. Looking forward v looking back. Two different ways of looking at the math - but ultimately you wind up in the same place because there is only one set of facts.

I'm confused. Why is this worth fighting over??

Because:

Although it's not strictly accurate, we all know they have no-one wanting them to come to bed.

So damn hard to let things go

 

[kjironman1]

To the people still arguing about this games over .500 shit

Shut the fuck up clap clap clapclapclap

Has this been talked about before?

 

[BonesJones]

Shut the fuck up clap clap clapclapclap

Directed at you though because you're 24 hours late and the discussion has already ceased.

But if you're trying to spark it back up again...