CORRECTED: Blazer history looks MOSTLY kindly upon being 2-2 in a 7-game series. This is when it's happened:
- 76-77 Finals vs. Sixers. Won series 4-2
- 89-90 WCSF vs. Spurs. Won series 4-3.
- 89-90 WCF vs. Suns. Won series 4-2.
- 91-92 WCF vs. Jazz. Won series 4-2.
- 91-92 Finals vs. Bulls. Lost series 4-2.
about 2 years ago
Badalona Baddie
18 comments
5 recs |
Email
PrintComments
i believe we were 2-2 to the bulls in 92
Michael Jordan is the Nicolas Batum of America
2 down, 14 to go
aw, shoot. You're right. I corrected it. Still, 4-1 ain't bad.
The only Vulcan with common sense is Spock.
by Badalona Baddie on Apr 26, 2010 7:20 AM PDT up reply actions
worth pointing out
we had home court in both 89-90 series and the 91-92 series against the Jazz.
So, looking at times when we didn’t have homecourt, we are 1-1.
Bigger stat to me is the one that says teams winning game 5 after being tied 2-2 win like 87% of the series. Tonight is HUGE.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Was NBA Finals a 2-2-1-1-1 format in '77?
Because if we won Game 6 without home court as the format is now (2-3-2), we would’ve been on the road in Philly and I’m pretty sure we won at home.
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21... I know...
"'Five Dollar Foot-long' is one of the best songs. That's a hot song. You've got the FreeCreditReport.com, and then 'Five Dollar Foot-long' comes on. When 'Five Dollar Foot-long' comes on, they should play that in the club. They should play all those in the club."
~ Ron Artest (link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090515)
by FibonacciSequence on Apr 26, 2010 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions
yes it was
the NBA stupidly changed it to 2-3-2 in the early 80s and stubbornly refused to do the right thing and switch it back to the much better 2-2-1-1-1 format
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
I totally agree. The 2-3-2 format is awful.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Apr 26, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
some history
2-3-2 started in the 1985 Finals. (25 times). The team with homecourt is 19-6 in those finals – a winning percentage of .760. Sure, you can say the favored team should win more often, but at a 3 to 1 clip in the finals? That’s too high, and I firmly believe the 2-3-2 is part of the reason why.
Furthermore, let’s look at the 6 cases where the “underdog” won the series:
1985 – LA over Boston in 6. LA was not able to win 3 consecutive home games, but was able to win TWICE in Boston to win the series
1993 – Chicago over Phoenix in 6. The road team won 5 out of the 6 games here, with the Bulls winning the first two in Phoenix to start the series
1995 – Houston over Orlando in 4. This was a sweep, so homecourt wasn’t really the issue
1998 – Chicago over Utah in 6. split the first two in Utah, but even the Bulls couldn’t win 3 straight at home, so they had to go back to Salt Lake to close it out.
2004 – Detroit over LA in 5. The Lakers just quit in this series, homecourt didn’t really factor, but this is one of the few times the underdog was able to win 3 straight home games.
2006 – Miami over Dallas in 6. Another 3 straight by the underdog, albeit with some help…
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
also
there is not a single case in 25 years of the underdog winning 3 straight at home and losing the series.
the ONLY times the underdog has been able to hold their home games are the two cases above – Detroit in 2004 and Miami in 2006.
The normal formula for winning as an underdog (in a 2-2-1-1-1 series) is to win all 3 home games, and try to steal game 1, 2, or 5 on the road (you don’t want to try and win a game 7 away from home…) However, since it is virtually impossible to win 3 straight games in any playoff series—especially as the lower seeded team, 2-3-2 pretty much forces the underdog to win not just once, but twice, on the road, since they are destined to lose at least one home game.
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
You'd favor a 1-1-2-3 series I'd imagine?
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Apr 26, 2010 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
totally a rec
"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare
Interesting
I understand the change for logistics sake, probably more for the media’s benefit than the teams, but I agree with you that it should be 2-2-1-1-1. I think I read somewhere that back in the day when the first round was best of 3, it was either the lower seed home in game 1 then the higher seed home for games 2-3, or maybe higher seed played games 1-2 at home and game 3, if the lower seed could force it, was rewarded with a home game to decide the series.
Now THAT is baffling.
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21... I know...
"'Five Dollar Foot-long' is one of the best songs. That's a hot song. You've got the FreeCreditReport.com, and then 'Five Dollar Foot-long' comes on. When 'Five Dollar Foot-long' comes on, they should play that in the club. They should play all those in the club."
~ Ron Artest (link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090515)
by FibonacciSequence on Apr 26, 2010 8:49 AM PDT reply actions
It was always 1-1-1 that I remember.
We beat the Bulls in PDX in games 1 and 3 of the first round and lost game 2 in Chicago in the 1977 championship year.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Apr 26, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
that series was a real war
replacement (scab) refs were calling everything
Lucas pulled the whistle out of the mouth of one of the refs to prevent being fouled out in one of the games, and he wasn’t “rung up” for a T
the Blazer players will never forget how their lockers shook in the old Chicago arena from the fans stamping their feet before the game
the Bulls were a veteran team with playoff experience. Norm van Lier. Jerry Sloan. Tom Boerwinkle. Bob Love. Chet Walker. The Blazers playoff run could’ve ended right there and no one would’ve been surprised
Yet they survived that series and made history. (By contrast, the WCF finals against L*A was a walk in the park.) The team didn’t face the same level of adversity again until after game 2 in Philly…but Luke took care of that with his impromptu “hand-shake” with Dawkins before game 3
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Stormin' Normin Van Lier & Jerry Sloan
Toughest backcourt in NBA history! It was a great series, but so short.
"Brandon eats first around here" - KP
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Apr 26, 2010 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Doh
That was meant as a reply to the above comment. I clearly don’t post enough here to remember how this works :(
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21... I know...
"'Five Dollar Foot-long' is one of the best songs. That's a hot song. You've got the FreeCreditReport.com, and then 'Five Dollar Foot-long' comes on. When 'Five Dollar Foot-long' comes on, they should play that in the club. They should play all those in the club."
~ Ron Artest (link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090515)
by FibonacciSequence on Apr 26, 2010 8:52 AM PDT reply actions
I have a super nintendo
and I need a copy of Blazers vs. Bulls.
Yes I am legitimately going to find this game if it costs me my life.
I'm gonna be the only A-hole that owns a Nic Batum jersey that doesn't live in France. Awesome.
here:
I remember there being a cheat in that game where you could literally make every shot from the bottom right corner (nearly a half-courter)…I always preferred the next year’s EA edition of the basketball series – NBA Showdown – where they dropped the ‘vs’ model (and in turn the ‘only playoff teams’ in the game) and allowed for all 27 teams…it was much faster than the vs series, too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um1yoRomWH8
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
