RealGM

Pretty simple thread. Just pick any player and judge their Finals appearances by the 1st game of each Finals only.

For example:

The Heat win the 2011 Finals with LeBron scoring a super-efficient 24, while Dirk poops his pants with 39% FG.

However the Heat go on to lose their next 3 Finals in a row, and LeBron loses all of his Finals except 2011 and 2020, making his legacy look much worse.



(and before you bring it up yes I know teams would play differently in this scenario)

Somebody should re-run the entire history of the NBA, every season, every playoff, with just the 1st game in EVERY series determining the winner.

Or, as per the OP, and presumably much easier, just tally up all the Game 1s of the actual Finals matchups.

Either way it will be interesting results I bet.

Ginoboleee wrote:Somebody should re-run the entire history of the NBA, every season, every playoff, with just the 1st game in EVERY series determining the winner.

Or, as per the OP, and presumably much easier, just tally up all the Game 1s of the actual Finals matchups.

Either way it will be interesting results I bet.

Your idea has the issue that each altered series would affect all the series that follow.

For example, in 2009 Yao Ming would eliminate Kobe/Pau in the 2nd round, so the 2009 WCF would be Rockets/Nuggets.
That didn't happen IRL, so we have no 1st game to work with.

Ein Sof wrote:

Ginoboleee wrote:Somebody should re-run the entire history of the NBA, every season, every playoff, with just the 1st game in EVERY series determining the winner.

Or, as per the OP, and presumably much easier, just tally up all the Game 1s of the actual Finals matchups.

Either way it will be interesting results I bet.

Your idea has the issue that each altered series would affect all the series that follow.

For example, in 2009 Yao Ming would eliminate Kobe/Pau in the 2nd round, so the 2009 WCF would be Rockets/Nuggets.
That didn't happen IRL, so we have no 1st game to work with.

Right, that is why in my first option I was trying to suggest a full computer simulation (sorry for any confusion in the original wording). I figured some folks around here have the technology.

Option 2 is the short cut to just look at the Finals and tally it up for fun.

Jordan would just 2 rings(1996 and 1997) if every series was just a one game series.

Ein Sof wrote:Pretty simple thread. Just pick any player and judge their Finals appearances by the 1st game of each Finals only.

For example:

The Heat win the 2011 Finals with LeBron scoring a super-efficient 24, while Dirk poops his pants with 39% FG.

However the Heat go on to lose their next 3 Finals in a row, and LeBron loses all of his Finals except 2011 and 2020, making his legacy look much worse.



(and before you bring it up yes I know teams would play differently in this scenario)

So Imma do it for LeBron in some more detail:

2007
- Cavs obviously lose
- LeBron looks even worse than IOTL, scoring just 14 on 4-16 shooting with 6 TOs, outproduced by Sasha Pavlovic, Drew Gooden, Anderson Varejao and Daniel Gibson.
- Duncan likely wins FMVP over Parker

2011
- Result-wise it's a redemption for LeBron, however many probably double down on the superteam narrative, dismissing the ring as fake ala KD

2012
- 1st Finals L for the Heat
- LeBron plays well with 30 on 54% TS, however Durant majorly outplays him with 36 on 75% TS, half of it in the 4th
- a narrative starts that LeBron can only win with prime Wade & Bosh
- a counter-narrative that Wade/Bosh were too sucky starts as well (since they shot pretty badly that game)

2013
- 2nd Finals L for the Heat
- LeBron has 18/18/10 for the game
- either Parker or Duncan wins FMVP

2014
- 3rd Finals L for the Heat
- the cramp ends up being even more talked about, turning the Finals into an all-time "what if" game
- Bosh and Allen end up playing well, negating the original "no help" narrative
- Duncan ends his career 6-0 in the Finals, surrendering the 2005 FMVP to Ginobili and maybe the 2013 one to Parker
- the Heat end their run likely considered a failure

2015
- LeBron is now 1-5 in the Finals
- another "what-if" game due to Kyrie's injury
- LeBron ends with a monster 44/8/6 on 47% FG, so there's no "lockdown" narrative for Iggy
- it's possible that LeBron wins FMVP on the losing team, despite Curry playing well

2016
- LeBron is now 1-6 in the Finals
- Cavs lose even with Kyrie and Love, unlike IOTL
- the FMVP might go to... Shaun Livingston, who scored 20 on 8-10 shooting (but likely Draymond nabs it)
- LeBron has a meh 23/12/9 instead of his IOTL series stats

2017
- LeBron is now 1-7 in the Finals, 0-3 with Kyrie/Love
- little changes from the real 2017 Finals, except that KD and Curry dominate even more
- LeBron has 28/15/8, but with 8 TOs

2018
- LeBron is now 1-8 in the Finals, leaving Cleveland with 0 rings
- however there's a good chance he gets FMVP despite the loss, as LeBron's game probably goes down as the GOAT Finals game

2020
- LeBron finally wins again and is 2-8 in the Finals
- however he is significantly outscored by AD, and arguably outplayed by Butler as well
- due to this he likely loses FMVP

Final Tally:
2 of 10 in the Finals
1 FMVP (2011), possibly 2 or 3 (2015, 2018)
The narrative that he can't win without exorbitant help is much much stronger, since he only wins with 2011 Wade/Bosh and while being outscored by AD throughout 2020.

I don't know if he would be ranked lower though, since so much changes in this alt-universe.


e: Funnily enough LeBron averages 28/11/7 in G1s. Which is almost exactly the same as his career Finals average of 28/10/8.

Homer38 wrote:Jordan would just 2 rings(1996 and 1997) if every series was just a one game series.

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

JordansBulls wrote:

Homer38 wrote:Jordan would just 2 rings(1996 and 1997) if every series was just a one game series.

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

I suspect you have no idea what they are talking about. Which is different.

Bulls lost 1st game in '91 finals (Lakers)
1st game in '92 ECSF (Knicks)
'... 93 ECF (Knicks)
... '98 Finals (Jazz)
[Didn't check all series (just 1st ones coming to mind each year, didn't check for counter-examples in 96, 97) so this may not be comprehensive.]
This is what is being said.

You can certainly question the relevance (OP notes an obvious flaw in that very opening post - a second similar one to the extension of this system to all rounds in the third post) or value of this process.

But I would think reading the thread, understanding the central conceit, that within that context it's fairly clear what they are talking about.

Owly wrote:

JordansBulls wrote:

Homer38 wrote:Jordan would just 2 rings(1996 and 1997) if every series was just a one game series.

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

I suspect you have no idea what they are talking about. Which is different.

Bulls lost 1st game in '91 finals (Lakers)
1st game in '92 ECSF (Knicks)
'... 93 ECF (Knicks)
... '98 Finals (Jazz)
[Didn't check all series (just 1st ones coming to mind each year, didn't check for counter-examples in 96, 97) so this may not be comprehensive.]
This is what is being said.

You can certainly question the relevance (OP notes an obvious flaw in that very opening post - a second similar one to the extension of this system to all rounds in the third post) or value of this process.

But I would think reading the thread, understanding the central conceit, that within that context it's fairly clear what they are talking about.

To be clear, this scenario is only for the Finals. So the Bulls make the Finals in '92 and '93 as they did IRL and then win.

Otherwise who'd win in '92 and '93?

Ein Sof wrote:Pretty simple thread. Just pick any player and judge their Finals appearances by the 1st game of each Finals only.

For example:

The Heat win the 2011 Finals with LeBron scoring a super-efficient 24, while Dirk poops his pants with 39% FG.

However the Heat go on to lose their next 3 Finals in a row, and LeBron loses all of his Finals except 2011 and 2020, making his legacy look much worse.



(and before you bring it up yes I know teams would play differently in this scenario)

Then you know this doesn’t make sense.

Best approach would be to see who plays best in elimination games/closeout games/game 7s (or game 5s or game 3s for the older days).

homecourtloss wrote:

Ein Sof wrote:Pretty simple thread. Just pick any player and judge their Finals appearances by the 1st game of each Finals only.

For example:

The Heat win the 2011 Finals with LeBron scoring a super-efficient 24, while Dirk poops his pants with 39% FG.

However the Heat go on to lose their next 3 Finals in a row, and LeBron loses all of his Finals except 2011 and 2020, making his legacy look much worse.



(and before you bring it up yes I know teams would play differently in this scenario)

Then you know this doesn’t make sense.

Best approach would be to see who plays best in elimination games/closeout games/game 7s (or game 5s or game 3s for the older days).

First - this thread isn't very serious

Second - elimination games and closeout games are different things, but these hypothetical Finals would be both at the same time.

So we can only really look at G7s (G5s for earlier 1st rounds), which are still different from this concept but either way....

Then LeBron averages 35/10 on 60% TS for his Finals career, winning 7 or 8 rings... consensus GOAT?

This idea is stupid because since guys know its a 7 game series, they may not go all out and their gameplan isn't fully shown until later on

Lebron usually has a feel out game in the 1st game and doesn't play with all his effort, he then ramps it up and adjusts pretty well

nzahir wrote:This idea is stupid because since guys know its a 7 game series, they may not go all out and their gameplan isn't fully shown until later on

Lebron usually has a feel out game in the 1st game and doesn't play with all his effort, he then ramps it up and adjusts pretty well

Hi nzahir! Are we sure we want to say that players aren't giving full effort in the NBA finals? What on earth would compel a player to not give full effort in the NBA finals? To give the opposing team a head start?

To be clear: I think your point that players play different in Game 1 vs later on is absolutely true! But to me, it's entirely from changing their gameplay as games go on, not holding back their gameplan and effort at the start of a series. What makes you say otherwise?

Re: "this idea is stupid", I tend to disagree. It may be overly simplistic to just look at who won Game 1 of the finals and assume nothing would change in this new world, but it's a perfectly good first-pass to get a draft of how things might change.

And I do think this question gets at something broader: if we didn't have 7 game series, how would we look at basketball history differently? You may think it's somewhat arbitrary to change a 7 Game Series to a 1 game series. But there are plenty of sports that have single-elimination playoffs. Pro American football is particularly popular. Even other basketball leagues like American College Basketball have playoffs with 1-game-series. I think it's actually arbitrary that the NBA went for 7 Game series. They could have just as likely gone with 5 Game Series or 9 game series or an 11 Game series (with a shorter regular season)... and if they did, to me I think it would be silly to assume that any champions wouldn't change throughout NBA history.

Going off my previous post, I think in shorter series there's far more randomness. The better team is more likely to win the longer the series is. So expect far more upsets even before the finals (though it's hard to predict which upsets exactly). And if the NBA had 1-game series since the beginning, expect the narrative/media/fans to favor what were actually upsets as "the better team winning" far more often than they should.

An interesting sub-question is who benefits the most from the current system which allows players to make in-series adjustments? Certain coaches benefit from this. In terms of players, smarter ones probably benefit from this more. LeBron's the easy example. The Warriors/Kerr/Draymond might be one if we assume they're healthy. So these smarter players might perform worse if they don't get to make in-series adjustments.

Other players to benefit would be people who have durability issues. I expect CP3 to rise tremendously (both in the narrative and in his playoff health chances), as long playoff series tend to wear down his body.

What about early rounds? In the NFL every playoff series is 1 loss go home. So it make sense here. lets look at the Bulls.

1989 for example.
Bulls still win round 1 vs Cavs
Bulls still win round 2 vs Knicks
Bulls defeat Pistons in game 1 so they go on to the NBA Finals.

It's tough but I don't think it's impossible for Jordan and the Bulls to pull it off. Crazy thing is this Laker team actually didn't lose a single game until the Finals where they get swept by Detroit. So it just comes down to who plays hardest in this Finals game 1 off. The Bulls having won the season series against the Lakers that year also helps their chances.

Many lesser teams would have rings

jasonxxx102 wrote:Many lesser teams would have rings

To be honest. When you think about it in a realistic way teams would have worked much harder if the playoffs were 1 win eliminated per round like the NFL. So I'm not sure how you can call any team lesser than another if they pull off that upset.

OdomFan wrote:

jasonxxx102 wrote:Many lesser teams would have rings

To be honest. When you think about it in a realistic way teams would have worked much harder if the playoffs were 1 win eliminated per round like the NFL. So I'm not sure how you can call any team lesser than another if they pull off that upset.

No simply because there is more variance in basketball than football. A simple off night would change the entire complexion of a game

homecourtloss wrote:

Ein Sof wrote:Pretty simple thread. Just pick any player and judge their Finals appearances by the 1st game of each Finals only.

For example:

The Heat win the 2011 Finals with LeBron scoring a super-efficient 24, while Dirk poops his pants with 39% FG.

However the Heat go on to lose their next 3 Finals in a row, and LeBron loses all of his Finals except 2011 and 2020, making his legacy look much worse.



(and before you bring it up yes I know teams would play differently in this scenario)

Then you know this doesn’t make sense.

Best approach would be to see who plays best in elimination games/closeout games/game 7s (or game 5s or game 3s for the older days).

Actually that approach doesn't make any more sense. You favor that approach for reasons Jordansbulls loves talking about HCA

Ein Sof wrote:
Then LeBron averages 35/10 on 60% TS for his Finals career, winning 7 or 8 rings... consensus GOAT?

That is the reason homecourtloss favors that approach