This should be a good year to really see what his rankings are made of, with the Spurs at #2 on his list but #13 in the league standings.

Others that look out of place:
Team/Hollinger/Standing
LA/7/2
DAL/13/4
POR/6/11

His playoff predictor shows a Jazz/Magic Finals, with the Spurs in a virtual tie with the Jazz. He also had the Jazz rated very high in 2008 when they were destroyed by the Lakers in round 2.

His stats should call for a Spurs dominating win over the Mavs in round 1. I have always defended him so this will be a tough one.

Hollinger have been proven incompetent for about five years running. He does a good job of creating interest about NBA on ESPN. That's his job and he succeeds. But the number crunching is a farce.

Hollinger

Hollinger is a moron... I believe he's giving the Mavs a 3 percent chance to win the west and a 1 percent chance to win it all. What a joke.

Hollinger has been living off a broken system simply because of the 2007 Mavs/Warriors series where his number had Dallas as only about a 60% chance to win that series.

When you read the "about this system" profile, he even states it in there.

I believe in is ability to model a complex system like I believe in the Loch Ness monster. When your "complex analysis" looks like nothing more than an attempt to make the basic 4 functions on a calculator look as difficult as possible, I'm extremely dubious.

i bet about 90 percent of tuned in Dallas Mavericks fans could have called the GSW upset... I saw it coming the whole time.

Wait, you meant that's as you watched GS beat the Mavs, you k ew they would lose? You could be an analyst

No, I watched the Mavs play them the previous two years and knew that if the Mavs were going to beat them they would be extremely lucky. The matchups were awful for the Mavs and for whatever reason guys like Stephen Jackson and Baron "Goatface" Davis relish playing the Mavs. (I think Jackson also killed them w/the Spurs in 2003 if memory serves)

Hollinger uses a lot of margin of victory in his numbers. Somehow, the Spurs are ranked very high in that category. I guess they were able to really pour it on the bad teams this year. Meanwhile, the Lakers have been coasting for two months now and they're stats show it.

Hollinger's stats are time sensitive.
They put a lot of stock in margin, especially in the last 25% of games.
They also put a lot of stock in opponent's winning %, particularly in the last 25% of games.

The Spurs have played well, against really good teams, and have beaten the hell out of some bad ones, in the past month. They haven't really been beaten badly by anyone, and almost all the NBA teams have been in cruise mode for the last month. It is no surprise the Spurs are rated so high just based on those numbers.

That said, I doubt it will translate to playoff success. The Spurs are still about a month or two away from being fluid and dominant. Hopefully they can build some momentum against Dallas and make it to the 2nd round, but I doubt it.

If they beat Dallas, all bets are off and they instantly become a contender, IMO.

anyone wanna put money on the spurs beating the mavs?

i'll take the mavs

How much money are you talking about?

quote:

---

i bet about 90 percent of tuned in Dallas Mavericks fans could have called the GSW upset... I saw it coming the whole time.

---

This

There was ONE team in the league that year that had any chance against Dallas in a seven game series

quote:

---

i bet about 90 percent of tuned in Dallas Mavericks fans could have called the GSW upset... I saw it coming the whole time.

---

sadly, this is true....i called it well before the end of the regular season that year. i wish they had tanked to get out of a GS matchup.

quote:

---

This

There was ONE team in the league that year that had any chance against Dallas in a seven game series

---

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

With homecourt advantage yall lost to a 44-40 team and you're talking about how unstoppable your team was

42-40

quote:

---

i wish they had tanked to get out of a GS matchup.

---

The Warriors barely beat out the Clippers to get the 8th seed on the last day, but they were the best team in the league the last quarter of the season (after they traded for SJax/Harrington and Baron returned from injury). The Mavs played them during the last week and rested the starters. So really the Mavs should have played hard that game to try to knock them out of the playoffs (but most likely they wouldn't have been able to beat them then as well)

"With homecourt advantage yall lost to a 44-40 team and you're talking about how unstoppable your team was"

It's called matchups. Golden State believed they owned us and they did for whatever reason. I called that as well before the series ever started. We owned everyone else in the league that year, we just couldn't figure out Golden State.

This year is no different. The spurs don't match up well against the Mavs, but yet I believe that they would have given the lakers fits.

quote:

---

We owned everyone else in the league that year, we just couldn't figure out Golden State.

---

whatever helps you sleep at night

While I wouldn't use the word "own", only Phoenix, Utah, and Golden State had multiple wins against the Mavs that year I believe.

[This message has been edited by keithd03 (edited 4/16/2010 3:07p).]

Right, and that equals postseason success.

The Cavs were 2-0 against the Spurs in 07. How did that go down in the finals?

In '06-'07, Mavs shot their bolt in the regular season. When everyone else was playing it safe and just making sure they would be in the playoffs, the Mavs ran out of gas chasing the '95-'96 Bulls.

[This message has been edited by aero ag 2010 (edited 4/16/2010 3:27p).]

Where did I say that equals post season success? If you watched all of the Mavs' games that year there was 1 team that stood out that absolutely killed us and we had a better chance of beating us than any other team in the league. Sure others team might have beaten us, but Golden State beating us was a given.

I still love the "running out of gas" theory.

I still love the "shoe-in for the trophy" theory.

InternetFan02, you're right, I was thinking of the end of the wrong season. Looking back at the western conference records, it would've been tough for the mavs to tank enough to lose the #1 seed. they should've played hard on the last night of the regular season.

>>Right, and that equals postseason success.<<

Oh, please. Everyone has playoff meltdowns, including the beloved Spurs:

Serious meltdowns include 1978, 1981, and 1991 (each time lost as a 2nd seed in their first playoff round) and 1995 (top seed lost to 6th seed Rockets);

Minor meltdowns include 1994, 2006, and 2009. This doesn't include other years where the Spurs lost to a lower seed (1994, 1996, and 2001). I wouldn't automatically label losing to a lower seed a meltdown, especially deep in the playoffs. But a 1st or 2nd seed not winning a playoff series (even before everyone played in the first round) IS a meltdown and there are many good teams that have these, not just Dallas and SA.

The Mavs have only lost to a lower seed in any playoff round 3 times: 2007 as a 1, 1987 as a 2, and 1985 (4/5 loss). 2007 is clearly an aberration. A bad one, mind you, but one still.

Hollinger is lookin pretty good so far.

quote:

---

His stats should call for a Spurs dominating win over the Mavs in round 1. I have always defended him so this will be a tough one.

---

I hate it when I'm right

The spurs ill almost certainly take the aria, but hollinger is still an idiot with a dumb "formula"

The spurs ill almost certainly take the series, but hollinger is still an idiot with a dumb "formula"

As I recall in 07, no one was saying the Warriors would beat the Mavs in that series before it started.

Hindsight seems to be 20/20.

I could have made some random formula before the playoffs alstarted saying the thunder would beat LA and I would look smart right now. With the west this year, any predictions look good. Well, except those that predicted Dallas playing in the finals( or getting to the 2nd round).