RealGM

Is there ever a case where your personal ranking of teams or players is circular?

For example, are there cases where you think :

Team A > Team B and Team B > Team C, but Team C > Team A

or

Player A > Player B and Player B > Player C, but Player C > Player A

Jim Naismith wrote:Is there ever a case where your personal ranking of teams or players is circular?

For example, are there cases where you think :

Team A > Team B and Team B > Team C, but Team C > Team A

or

Player A > Player B and Player B > Player C, but Player C > Player A

In the 2013-14 playoffs, San Antonio beat Portland and Portland beat Houston.
Yet, Houston beat San Antonio 4-0 in their regular season games, so:

SA > Portland, Portland > Houston, but Houston > SA

Jim Naismith wrote:
In the 2013-14 playoffs, San Antonio beat Portland and Portland beat Houston.
Yet, Houston beat San Antonio 4-0 in their regular season games, so:

SA > Portland, Portland > Houston, but Houston > SA

Regular season means nothing, especially for the Spurs.

I've had feelings like this within my ATL. Instances where I had Player A ranked the highest, followed by Player B, then Player C (wherein Player C is an active player). After a good season I'd want to move Player C up in the ranking, and discovered I felt more comfortable moving C ahead of A than I did moving him ahead of B.

Colbinii wrote:

Jim Naismith wrote:
In the 2013-14 playoffs, San Antonio beat Portland and Portland beat Houston.
Yet, Houston beat San Antonio 4-0 in their regular season games, so:

SA > Portland, Portland > Houston, but Houston > SA

Regular season means nothing, especially for the Spurs.

A NBA champion on the wrong end of a (4-game!) regular-season sweep is still food for thought.

I think most of the season people belived.

Miami>Okc.
Okc>spurs
Spurs>Miami

Purch wrote:I think most of the season people belived.

Miami>Okc.
Okc>spurs
Spurs>Miami

I dislike OKC and rooted for the Spurs the entire playoffs, but I think that may still be true. The Spurs were lucky enough to be fully healthy for the first time a long time while OKC played two very important games without Ibaka. The series could have been completely different had Ibaka played in the first two games at 100%.

jeff1624 wrote:

Purch wrote:I think most of the season people belived.

Miami>Okc.
Okc>spurs
Spurs>Miami

I dislike OKC and rooted for the Spurs the entire playoffs, but I think that may still be true. The Spurs were lucky enough to be fully healthy for the first time a long time while OKC played two very important games without Ibaka. The series could have been completely different had Ibaka played in the first two games at 100%.

But if the Thunder took an early lead on the series, that Probally also means that Diaw gets inserted into the lineup early in the series

trex_8063 wrote:I've had feelings like this within my ATL. Instances where I had Player A ranked the highest, followed by Player B, then Player C (wherein Player C is an active player). After a good season I'd want to move Player C up in the ranking, and discovered I felt more comfortable moving C ahead of A than I did moving him ahead of B.

Who are the players that you had in mind?

2010 you might make the argument that:

Cleveland>LA
LA>Boston
Boston>Cleveland

In terms of players, Hakeem/Duncan/Shaq has me going in circles sometimes.

Right now I feel like:

Shaq>Hakeem
Hakeem>Duncan
Duncan>Shaq