The technical name is “regression toward the mean.” My dad refers to it as “the law of averages.” The basic idea is that if you look at performance over select, short spans of time, luck can play a large part in how well a player or team plays. Or, more accurately, a player or team can get on a hot streak or cold streak, and their numbers during those streaks will be either insanely good or insanely bad. But if you look at performance over a longer span of time, good luck / hot streaks are cancelled out by bad luck / cold streaks, and what you’re left with is performance based wholly on the player’s or team’s skill level. For example: ORL overall FG pct vs. CLE: 48.2% ORL 3pt FG pct vs. CLE: 40.8% Alston + Pietrus 3 pt FG pct vs. CLE: 42.4% ORL overall FG pct vs. LAL: 42.4% ORL 3pt FG pct vs. LAL: 31.9% Alston + Pietrus 3 pt FG pct vs. LAL: 19.7% I haven’t done the math, but I bet if you averaged out Orlando’s stats in these two series, you’d get something very close to their overall regular season averages in each category. Or, if you want a short term version of it, keep in mind that Orlando shot a record 62.5% from the floor in Game 3 but that 2 games earlier I believe they either scored the fewest field goals ever in a single NBA Finals game, or were at least in contention for it. (Sorry, I don’t feel like looking it up right now – my head is still spinning from the fact that Mark Jackson proclaimed with a few minutes left to go in the fourth quarter that Kobe literally is “a guy without flaws.” More on ESPN’s NBA announcing troika tomorrow.) I don’t want to downplay the fact that the Lakers’ defenders were able to cause more problems than the Cavs’. They were taller, longer, and more athletic than we were at almost every position other than SF, and they were able to foul Da-wight a lot more effectively in terms of preventing him from making the actual basket when fouled in the act of shooting. And I think Da-wight averaged about 1 dunk a game in the Finals vs. what felt like 1 dunk per 2 minutes vs. the Cavs. That said, shooting comes and goes, even when a player is wide open. The Magic still got a ton of great looks at 3s, lay-ups, etc, and they just flat out missed way more often than they did in the previous series. So with all this said, are the Magic a freakish, sharp-shooting juggernaut that’s going to rule the Eastern Conference for the next five years? Or a good but flawed team that got really hot for a total of 7 games prior to the Finals (game 7 of Boston series plus the entire Eastern Conference Finals) and then reverted? You tell me. T.
(view comments)
