A very interesting ESPN insider article. (Signs pointing to the Spurs)

[VengefulAngel]

All signs point to a Spurs title
Analyzing three decades' worth of Finals trends to anticipate winner

Regression analysis shows one team is significantly favored heading into the NBA Finals.
The Miami Heat and San Antonio Spurs have reached the NBA Finals, setting up a rematch of last year's classic seven-game battle. With four days between the conclusion of the conference finals and Game 1, now comes the real fun: predicting the outcome.

Predicting the NBA Finals is somewhat different from other playoff series. First, there's more playoff data available -- three full rounds against a variety of opponents, giving a better idea of who's playing better right now. Second, because the teams have played each other just twice during the regular season, there's less head-to-head data to determine whether the matchup is good or bad.

So what has really mattered when picking the winner of past Finals? And what does that say about this year's series? Let's take a look.

Matters: Regular-Season Records
Ordinarily, statistical projections will start with point differential. But when it comes to the NBA Finals, during the past three decades, records have matched up better with results than differential.

When the two teams were separated by three games or fewer during the regular season, teams with home-court advantage have actually been more likely to get upset than win the series, going 4-5. But when they won at least six more games during the regular season, they've gone a dominant 16-2, with 1995 (Houston over Orlando) and 2006 (Miami over Dallas) the lone exceptions. That's bad news for the Heat, who finished eight games behind the Spurs in the standings.


Doesn't Matter: Head-to-Head Results
Against conference foes, there is predictive value to the regular-season series between the two teams -- especially in the opening round. That doesn't carry over to the NBA Finals. Two games simply aren't enough to tell us much about how the teams match up.

Half of the past 30 Finalists have split the season series, as Miami and San Antonio did this season. Though nine of the other 15 Finals were won by the team that swept the season series, that doesn't provide much new information because most of those teams had home-court advantage. The lower-seeded team has gone on to win the Finals just once out of the four times it swept in the regular season.

Matters: Playoff Performance
It pays to be hot going into the Finals. When the lower-seeded team had a better point differential during the first three rounds of the playoffs, adjusted for schedule, the series is nearly a toss-up -- the favorites win 57.1 percent of the time (8-6). When the team with home court also has performed better during the playoffs, however, they're a dominant 14-2 (87.5 percent), with 1998 (Chicago over Utah, when the two teams were nearly even leading up to the Finals) and 2006 (Miami over Dallas, again) the exceptions.

The Heat (plus-7.0) and Spurs (plus-8.0) had similar average margins en route to the Finals. However, San Antonio played a much more difficult schedule in the competitive West. So San Antonio's adjusted differential of plus-11.6 points per game is much better than Miami's plus-8.1 mark.

Doesn't Matter: Games Played
Because the Spurs went a full seven games in the first round, the Heat have played three fewer games in the postseason. Turns out that extra rest is not a factor in why playoff performance to date matters in the Finals. In fact, favorites who have played more games (like San Antonio) have actually tended to perform slightly better than expected, possibly because it means they've faced more challenging opposition.

Matters: Defensive Rating
Yes, defense wins championships -- as long as it is paired with a good-enough offense to get to the Finals. The team with the better defensive rating during the regular season has won 19 out of the past 30 Finals, a figure that substantially understates its importance. See, offense-first teams are more likely to have home court in the Finals. When the better defensive team also has home-court advantage, it has won 86.7 percent of the time (13-2). And better defensive teams have frequently pulled upsets without home court, going 6-9 (40 percent) in those series.

Again, the importance of defense favors the Spurs. They were the better defense in the regular season, ranking fourth in points allowed per 100 possessions; Miami finished 11th. The Heat would be the first team to win the championship while finishing outside the league's top 10 defenses since the 2001 Lakers (21st).

Unlike those Lakers, Miami hasn't yet shown the ability to turn on its defense for extended stretches during the playoffs. The Heat reached the Finals largely on the strength of their offense, which dominated the league's No. 1 (Indiana) and No. 6 (Charlotte) defenses. Miami scored 12.9 more points per 100 possessions during the East playoffs than its opponents allowed during the regular season (weighted by games played), but allowed them to score 2.8 more points per 100 possessions than usual.

By contrast, San Antonio's playoff run has been incredibly balanced. In fact, the Spurs have been slightly better on defense (plus-7.4 points per 100 possessions better than opponent averages) than offense (plus-6.9). That kind of balance is rare in the postseason. Just five teams since the ABA-NBA merger have been at least six points better than average per 100 possessions at both ends of the court.

Putting it Together
A regression that combines regular-season win differential and playoff performance leading up to the Finals -- but not defensive rating, which isn't statistically significant as part of a regression -- correctly retrodicts 27 of the past 30 Finals outcomes. Based on that, San Antonio has an 88 percent chance of winning the Finals.

The good news for Miami? As you might guess from going through the indicators, the biggest upset in modern Finals history was pulled off by another Heat team with Dwyane Wade.

http://i58.tinypic.com/2yubzt1.png

Still, nine of the 10 teams most heavily favored entering the Finals won the series, and none of the underdogs even forced a Game 7. The 2006 Finals are also the exception to the rule when it comes to favorites who had a better point differential in both the regular season and the conference playoffs. Those teams are 11-1 in the past three decades.

Despite this overwhelming evidence, the Heat are only slight underdogs to win the series in Las Vegas. The most common line suggests the Spurs have a 57 percent chance to win. In part, the discrepancy can be traced to the popularity of Miami, as two-time defending champion. But it also surely reflects a belief we still haven't seen the best of the Heat, given Miami's tendency to play better when behind in series and in fourth quarters.

That might prove the case, because the Heat haven't yet been seriously challenged in the playoffs. But they'll have to raise their level considerably to match the way San Antonio is playing. Six times this postseason, the Spurs have beaten opponents by 20 points more than an average team in the same situation. Miami has done that only once -- the closeout Game 6 against Indiana.

If the Heat are to win their third consecutive championship, it will mean defying three decades' worth of Finals trends.

[VengefulAngel]

I'm not sure the exact regression-model used, but it has provided extraordinary accuracy at predicting who will win an NBA championship.

[russwest0]

they didn't analyze the refs tho

[VengefulAngel]

they didn't analyze the refs tho

Implied when they refer to the 2006 NBA finals.

[russwest0]

Implied when they refer to the 2006 NBA finals.

yeah, I did get a good kick out of the 2006 Finals being the exception to basically every rule :oldlol:

[VengefulAngel]

Would love to see the adjusted R squared values by adding different variables to this regression, and the p-values.

[LeBron 06]

they didn't analyze the refs tho


You're a fan OKC, so shut up

[russwest0]

You're a fan OKC, so shut up

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

I'm a Utah Jazz fan.

[LeBron 06]

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

I'm a Utah Jazz fan.


:yaohappy: liar

[edrick]

they didn't analyze the refs tho

STFU about the refs already. The Heat were not favored against them last year.

[Dr.J4ever]

All signs point to a Spurs title
Analyzing three decades' worth of Finals trends to anticipate winner

Regression analysis shows one team is significantly favored heading into the NBA Finals.
The Miami Heat and San Antonio Spurs have reached the NBA Finals, setting up a rematch of last year's classic seven-game battle. With four days between the conclusion of the conference finals and Game 1, now comes the real fun: predicting the outcome.

Predicting the NBA Finals is somewhat different from other playoff series. First, there's more playoff data available -- three full rounds against a variety of opponents, giving a better idea of who's playing better right now. Second, because the teams have played each other just twice during the regular season, there's less head-to-head data to determine whether the matchup is good or bad.

So what has really mattered when picking the winner of past Finals? And what does that say about this year's series? Let's take a look.

Matters: Regular-Season Records
Ordinarily, statistical projections will start with point differential. But when it comes to the NBA Finals, during the past three decades, records have matched up better with results than differential.

When the two teams were separated by three games or fewer during the regular season, teams with home-court advantage have actually been more likely to get upset than win the series, going 4-5. But when they won at least six more games during the regular season, they've gone a dominant 16-2, with 1995 (Houston over Orlando) and 2006 (Miami over Dallas) the lone exceptions. That's bad news for the Heat, who finished eight games behind the Spurs in the standings.


Doesn't Matter: Head-to-Head Results
Against conference foes, there is predictive value to the regular-season series between the two teams -- especially in the opening round. That doesn't carry over to the NBA Finals. Two games simply aren't enough to tell us much about how the teams match up.

Half of the past 30 Finalists have split the season series, as Miami and San Antonio did this season. Though nine of the other 15 Finals were won by the team that swept the season series, that doesn't provide much new information because most of those teams had home-court advantage. The lower-seeded team has gone on to win the Finals just once out of the four times it swept in the regular season.

Matters: Playoff Performance
It pays to be hot going into the Finals. When the lower-seeded team had a better point differential during the first three rounds of the playoffs, adjusted for schedule, the series is nearly a toss-up -- the favorites win 57.1 percent of the time (8-6). When the team with home court also has performed better during the playoffs, however, they're a dominant 14-2 (87.5 percent), with 1998 (Chicago over Utah, when the two teams were nearly even leading up to the Finals) and 2006 (Miami over Dallas, again) the exceptions.

The Heat (plus-7.0) and Spurs (plus-8.0) had similar average margins en route to the Finals. However, San Antonio played a much more difficult schedule in the competitive West. So San Antonio's adjusted differential of plus-11.6 points per game is much better than Miami's plus-8.1 mark.

Doesn't Matter: Games Played
Because the Spurs went a full seven games in the first round, the Heat have played three fewer games in the postseason. Turns out that extra rest is not a factor in why playoff performance to date matters in the Finals. In fact, favorites who have played more games (like San Antonio) have actually tended to perform slightly better than expected, possibly because it means they've faced more challenging opposition.

Matters: Defensive Rating
Yes, defense wins championships -- as long as it is paired with a good-enough offense to get to the Finals. The team with the better defensive rating during the regular season has won 19 out of the past 30 Finals, a figure that substantially understates its importance. See, offense-first teams are more likely to have home court in the Finals. When the better defensive team also has home-court advantage, it has won 86.7 percent of the time (13-2). And better defensive teams have frequently pulled upsets without home court, going 6-9 (40 percent) in those series.

Again, the importance of defense favors the Spurs. They were the better defense in the regular season, ranking fourth in points allowed per 100 possessions; Miami finished 11th. The Heat would be the first team to win the championship while finishing outside the league's top 10 defenses since the 2001 Lakers (21st).

Unlike those Lakers, Miami hasn't yet shown the ability to turn on its defense for extended stretches during the playoffs. The Heat reached the Finals largely on the strength of their offense, which dominated the league's No. 1 (Indiana) and No. 6 (Charlotte) defenses. Miami scored 12.9 more points per 100 possessions during the East playoffs than its opponents allowed during the regular season (weighted by games played), but allowed them to score 2.8 more points per 100 possessions than usual.

By contrast, San Antonio's playoff run has been incredibly balanced. In fact, the Spurs have been slightly better on defense (plus-7.4 points per 100 possessions better than opponent averages) than offense (plus-6.9). That kind of balance is rare in the postseason. Just five teams since the ABA-NBA merger have been at least six points better than average per 100 possessions at both ends of the court.

Putting it Together
A regression that combines regular-season win differential and playoff performance leading up to the Finals -- but not defensive rating, which isn't statistically significant as part of a regression -- correctly retrodicts 27 of the past 30 Finals outcomes. Based on that, San Antonio has an 88 percent chance of winning the Finals.

The good news for Miami? As you might guess from going through the indicators, the biggest upset in modern Finals history was pulled off by another Heat team with Dwyane Wade.

http://i58.tinypic.com/2yubzt1.png

Still, nine of the 10 teams most heavily favored entering the Finals won the series, and none of the underdogs even forced a Game 7. The 2006 Finals are also the exception to the rule when it comes to favorites who had a better point differential in both the regular season and the conference playoffs. Those teams are 11-1 in the past three decades.

Despite this overwhelming evidence, the Heat are only slight underdogs to win the series in Las Vegas. The most common line suggests the Spurs have a 57 percent chance to win. In part, the discrepancy can be traced to the popularity of Miami, as two-time defending champion. But it also surely reflects a belief we still haven't seen the best of the Heat, given Miami's tendency to play better when behind in series and in fourth quarters.

That might prove the case, because the Heat haven't yet been seriously challenged in the playoffs. But they'll have to raise their level considerably to match the way San Antonio is playing. Six times this postseason, the Spurs have beaten opponents by 20 points more than an average team in the same situation. Miami has done that only once -- the closeout Game 6 against Indiana.

If the Heat are to win their third consecutive championship, it will mean defying three decades' worth of Finals trends.
:applause: Thanks for the ESPN Insider! Very interesting stuff. It actually confirms most of what I thought.:cheers:

[russwest0]

STFU about the refs already. The Heat were not favored against them last year.

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

we have had people come in here and post multiple stats about some of the officials that have officiated the heat this year. dan crawford and james capers to name two have officiated the heat to ridiculous records. they are 22-0 when capers officiates them and somehow he's still in the playoffs.

you're either a clown or you don't bet on sports for a living like I do if you don't think the officials are important when analyzing who the favorite is

[inclinerator]

never bet against the mj of this era

[VengefulAngel]

never bet against the mj of this era

MJ was never a statistical underdog in the same manner the Heat are.

[inclinerator]

MJ was never a statistical underdog in the same manner the Heat are.

never bet against the mj of this era

[Destroyer9]

Most shocking thing that I see is that the 01 sixers had the same record as the 01 lakers :eek:

[Paul George 24]

never bet against the mj of this era

mj :lol

http://www.morningprint.com/updata/user_img/nanna20140603021838.gif

[VengefulAngel]

never bet against the mj of this era

My point is that even MJ may not have overcome this. Lebron may be MJ like and still lose. This Spurs team is one of the best in recent memory.

[Nuff Said]

If heat win it's not defying any trend. The trend is not 100%, just more than likely but even the trend states shit happens.

[JUDGE WITNESS]

just makes it all the more sweeter when miami bust that ass :applause:

[Paul George 24]

If heat win it's not defying any trend. The trend is not 100%, just more than likely but even the trend states shit happens.

heat never tested yet,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:banana:
spurs beat mavs,blazers,thunders,how about heat :oldlol:

[Paul George 24]

just makes it all the more sweeter when miami bust that ass :applause:

spurs in 6

http://www.morningprint.com/updata/user_img/nanna20140603021838.gif

[VengefulAngel]

spurs in 6

http://www.morningprint.com/updata/user_img/nanna20140603021838.gif

Can you please stop posting irrelevant gifs, you make yourself look foolish.

[Unbiased_one]

These guys have ignored the most important part of statistical analysis:context. It was manifestly obvious that the heat coasted for large parts of the regular season. I don't think any of the analysis done in OP is particularly relevant.

[VengefulAngel]

These guys have ignored the most important part of statistical analysis:context. It was manifestly obvious that the heat coasted for large parts of the regular season. I don't think any of the analysis done in OP is particularly relevant.

Agreed, but we could argue that the Spurs also managed to rest their starters by not playing anyone less than 30 minutes.

[DMAVS41]

These guys have ignored the most important part of statistical analysis:context. It was manifestly obvious that the heat coasted for large parts of the regular season. I don't think any of the analysis done in OP is particularly relevant.

Bingo.

And it's no shock that in 06, the big outlier, Shaq was hurt in the regular season...

Heat went 42-17 with him...and 10-13 without him.

I love stats like that, but they seem irrelevant to this season and certainly to 06.

[Kingwillball]

All signs point to a Spurs title
Analyzing three decades' worth of Finals trends to anticipate winner

Regression analysis shows one team is significantly favored heading into the NBA Finals.
The Miami Heat and San Antonio Spurs have reached the NBA Finals, setting up a rematch of last year's classic seven-game battle. With four days between the conclusion of the conference finals and Game 1, now comes the real fun: predicting the outcome.

Predicting the NBA Finals is somewhat different from other playoff series. First, there's more playoff data available -- three full rounds against a variety of opponents, giving a better idea of who's playing better right now. Second, because the teams have played each other just twice during the regular season, there's less head-to-head data to determine whether the matchup is good or bad.

So what has really mattered when picking the winner of past Finals? And what does that say about this year's series? Let's take a look.

Matters: Regular-Season Records
Ordinarily, statistical projections will start with point differential. But when it comes to the NBA Finals, during the past three decades, records have matched up better with results than differential.

When the two teams were separated by three games or fewer during the regular season, teams with home-court advantage have actually been more likely to get upset than win the series, going 4-5. But when they won at least six more games during the regular season, they've gone a dominant 16-2, with 1995 (Houston over Orlando) and 2006 (Miami over Dallas) the lone exceptions. That's bad news for the Heat, who finished eight games behind the Spurs in the standings.


Doesn't Matter: Head-to-Head Results
Against conference foes, there is predictive value to the regular-season series between the two teams -- especially in the opening round. That doesn't carry over to the NBA Finals. Two games simply aren't enough to tell us much about how the teams match up.

Half of the past 30 Finalists have split the season series, as Miami and San Antonio did this season. Though nine of the other 15 Finals were won by the team that swept the season series, that doesn't provide much new information because most of those teams had home-court advantage. The lower-seeded team has gone on to win the Finals just once out of the four times it swept in the regular season.

Matters: Playoff Performance
It pays to be hot going into the Finals. When the lower-seeded team had a better point differential during the first three rounds of the playoffs, adjusted for schedule, the series is nearly a toss-up -- the favorites win 57.1 percent of the time (8-6). When the team with home court also has performed better during the playoffs, however, they're a dominant 14-2 (87.5 percent), with 1998 (Chicago over Utah, when the two teams were nearly even leading up to the Finals) and 2006 (Miami over Dallas, again) the exceptions.

The Heat (plus-7.0) and Spurs (plus-8.0) had similar average margins en route to the Finals. However, San Antonio played a much more difficult schedule in the competitive West. So San Antonio's adjusted differential of plus-11.6 points per game is much better than Miami's plus-8.1 mark.

Doesn't Matter: Games Played
Because the Spurs went a full seven games in the first round, the Heat have played three fewer games in the postseason. Turns out that extra rest is not a factor in why playoff performance to date matters in the Finals. In fact, favorites who have played more games (like San Antonio) have actually tended to perform slightly better than expected, possibly because it means they've faced more challenging opposition.

Matters: Defensive Rating
Yes, defense wins championships -- as long as it is paired with a good-enough offense to get to the Finals. The team with the better defensive rating during the regular season has won 19 out of the past 30 Finals, a figure that substantially understates its importance. See, offense-first teams are more likely to have home court in the Finals. When the better defensive team also has home-court advantage, it has won 86.7 percent of the time (13-2). And better defensive teams have frequently pulled upsets without home court, going 6-9 (40 percent) in those series.

Again, the importance of defense favors the Spurs. They were the better defense in the regular season, ranking fourth in points allowed per 100 possessions; Miami finished 11th. The Heat would be the first team to win the championship while finishing outside the league's top 10 defenses since the 2001 Lakers (21st).

Unlike those Lakers, Miami hasn't yet shown the ability to turn on its defense for extended stretches during the playoffs. The Heat reached the Finals largely on the strength of their offense, which dominated the league's No. 1 (Indiana) and No. 6 (Charlotte) defenses. Miami scored 12.9 more points per 100 possessions during the East playoffs than its opponents allowed during the regular season (weighted by games played), but allowed them to score 2.8 more points per 100 possessions than usual.

By contrast, San Antonio's playoff run has been incredibly balanced. In fact, the Spurs have been slightly better on defense (plus-7.4 points per 100 possessions better than opponent averages) than offense (plus-6.9). That kind of balance is rare in the postseason. Just five teams since the ABA-NBA merger have been at least six points better than average per 100 possessions at both ends of the court.

Putting it Together
A regression that combines regular-season win differential and playoff performance leading up to the Finals -- but not defensive rating, which isn't statistically significant as part of a regression -- correctly retrodicts 27 of the past 30 Finals outcomes. Based on that, San Antonio has an 88 percent chance of winning the Finals.

The good news for Miami? As you might guess from going through the indicators, the biggest upset in modern Finals history was pulled off by another Heat team with Dwyane Wade.

http://i58.tinypic.com/2yubzt1.png

Still, nine of the 10 teams most heavily favored entering the Finals won the series, and none of the underdogs even forced a Game 7. The 2006 Finals are also the exception to the rule when it comes to favorites who had a better point differential in both the regular season and the conference playoffs. Those teams are 11-1 in the past three decades.

Despite this overwhelming evidence, the Heat are only slight underdogs to win the series in Las Vegas. The most common line suggests the Spurs have a 57 percent chance to win. In part, the discrepancy can be traced to the popularity of Miami, as two-time defending champion. But it also surely reflects a belief we still haven't seen the best of the Heat, given Miami's tendency to play better when behind in series and in fourth quarters.

That might prove the case, because the Heat haven't yet been seriously challenged in the playoffs. But they'll have to raise their level considerably to match the way San Antonio is playing. Six times this postseason, the Spurs have beaten opponents by 20 points more than an average team in the same situation. Miami has done that only once -- the closeout Game 6 against Indiana.

If the Heat are to win their third consecutive championship, it will mean defying three decades' worth of Finals trends.

Problem with this is Miami defense is better and the point differential is skewed cause of the OKC blowouts and Portland blowouts however SA was blown out as well. The heat have been much more consistent

[arifgokcen]

Agreed, but we could argue that the Spurs also managed to rest their starters by not playing anyone less than 30 minutes.
Yeah we could argue that but we could also argue resting stars matter a lot more..Even though duncan and parker are stil the stars of their team spurs proved time and time again they can win without any of their stars.

and miami is a top-heavy team.They rely on their stars to produce more.

Anyway with all that said i expect spurs to win in 7

[lilgodfather1]

There is no way to statistically measure the superstar factor. In this series Miami has the two best players. Wade is completely healthy. There is no way to measure that. If LeBron beasts, or Wade beasts the Spurs just have no chance at winning.

[huskerdu]

There is no way to statistically measure the superstar factor. In this series Miami has the two best players. Wade is completely healthy. There is no way to measure that. If LeBron beasts, or Wade beasts the Spurs just have no chance at winning.

OKC also had the two best players in the last series and look how that turned out.

Spurs are literally the worst matchup in the league for Miami. Yes, worse than Indiana.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

inb4 Miami wins the first two:roll: :roll: :roll:

[HurricaneKid]

All signs point to a Spurs title
Blah blah blah.

Being able to correlate similarities over the last 30 years does not mean you can use that data to predict future events. More commonly referred to as "correlation does not imply causation".

For instance, I could gather data from the last 30 years and say "teams with a player named Jordan are 240% more likely to win the NBA Championship." This doesn't mean everyone should go out and trade for Deandre and increase their odds of winning the title. It means something happened in the past.

Several of those data sets are particularly skewed. Listen to Kerr talk about what the end of that first threepeat was for Chicago. Everyone was EXHAUSTED. So the Heat sat out an All-NBA player 1/3 of the season. LeBron played 200+ minutes fewer than he did in his ROOKIE YEAR. Their defense was hardly ever at playoff intensity.

I think SA should probably even be favored. But 88%? Nah. Not even close. And certainly not for the reasons listed above.

[Dresta]

Being able to correlate similarities over the last 30 years does not mean you can use that data to predict future events. More commonly referred to as "correlation does not imply causation".

For instance, I could gather data from the last 30 years and say "teams with a player named Jordan are 240% more likely to win the NBA Championship." This doesn't mean everyone should go out and trade for Deandre and increase their odds of winning the title. It means something happened in the past.

Several of those data sets are particularly skewed. Listen to Kerr talk about what the end of that first threepeat was for Chicago. Everyone was EXHAUSTED. So the Heat sat out an All-NBA player 1/3 of the season. LeBron played 200+ minutes fewer than he did in his ROOKIE YEAR. Their defense was hardly ever at playoff intensity.

I think SA should probably even be favored. But 88%? Nah. Not even close. And certainly not for the reasons listed above.
This. Miami viewed the regular season as a warm-up exercise this year. Mere statistical correlation doesn't account for things like that.

[ProfessorMurder]

This. Miami viewed the regular season as a warm-up exercise this year. Mere statistical correlation doesn't account for things like that.

Like the Spurs didn't use the season as practice? Pop literally said he was playing with lineups and resting people all year.

[Dresta]

Like the Spurs didn't use the season as practice? Pop literally said he was playing with lineups and resting people all year.
Sure, but the Spurs have more depth, and also don't run a defensive scheme that requires very high energy levels if your team isn't going to give up a load of uncontested 3's. SA were still the 4th best defense in the league this regular season, whereas Miami were 11th. Miami's defense is clearly a whole lot better than that, whereas SA's is likely better, but there is not such a difference.

[Anaximandro1]

-Heat are the clear cut favorites on paper.

-Since the 1991 playoffs, the NBA champions have a superstar with a PER above 24.6

-LeBron James is the only player in the Finals that meets the requirement. No one else comes close.

-The 2004 Pistons and 2008 Celtics were a total anomaly. And Garnett's PER is relatively high compared to other players (Wade, Duncan)


That said, I'm moderately optimistic about the Spurs' chances:

-Perfect teamwork and HCA.

-They have players that can be dominant in short stretches.

-They're angry. Extremely angry.



These guys have ignored the most important part of statistical analysis:context. It was manifestly obvious that the heat coasted for large parts of the regular season. I don't think any of the analysis done in OP is particularly relevant.

SAS did the same thing.

The Spurs had a terrible 6-13 mark against the league's other top-six teams this season.