Kawhi eliminated the #1 and #2 SRS teams in 2019 playoffs

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Kawhi is the man that is why.

Exactly. These imbeciles will figure it out sooner or later.

[Axe]

Kawhi was the only one playing a super team Butler/Embiid/Simmons

Superteam?

[SouBeachTalents]

Kawhi was the only one playing a super team Butler/Embiid/Simmons

'08 Celtics & '13 Spurs >>> '19 76ers

[HBK_Kliq_2]

'08 Celtics & '13 Spurs >>> '19 76ers

2013 spurs were overrated. Bunch of players past their prime or haven't hit their prime. They played Pau Gasol Lakers lol and then Marc Gasol grizzles. D'antoni coaching Dwight hahahah that's like a personal trainer dating a fat girl. And Dwight was washed up as a best player, never was a great one to begin with. They didn't have to face Durant either.

2008 Celtics you lost the damn series and arguably outplayed by Paul Pierce. Pierce/Butler are similar players as well in terms if impact. Imagine if Butler went off for 41 points and 73% TS? Nurse had Kawhi guard Butler in game 7.

[light]

Bucks were #1 SRS and Warriors were #2 SRS.

Has any other player ever eliminated the top 2 SRS teams? Or at least the top 2 SRS teams that doesn't include them.

SRS is an old NFL statistic that people started using for the NBA. The creator of the stat says it's predictive and not retrodictive, meaning it's poor at analyzing what a team did in the past and is mostly useful for predicting what a team may do in the future.

SRS is a predictive system rather than a retrodictive system - this is a very important distinction. Some ratings try to answer the question: which team is stronger? I.e. which team is more likely to win a game tomorrow? Some ratings try to answer the question: which of these teams accomplished more in the past? The systems that answer the first questions more accurately are called predictive systems. The systems that answer the other questions more accurately are called retrodictive systems. As it turns out, SRS is a pretty good predictive system. For the reasons described below, SRS is not a good retrodictive system.

Retrodiction, noun, /ˌretrəˈdikSH(ə)n/: the explanation or interpretation of past actions or events inferred from the laws that are assumed to have governed them.

The creator of SRS continues about its drawbacks:

"It weights all games equally - every football fan knows that the Colts' week 17 game against Arizona was a meaningless exhibition, but the algorithm gives it the same weight as all the rest of the games.

It weights all points equally, and therefore ignores wins and losses - If you take away 10 points from the Colts in week 3 and give them back 10 points in week 4, you've just changed their record, but you haven't changed their rating at all. If you take away 10 points in week 3 and give back 20 points in week 4, you have made their record worse but their rating better. Most football fans put a high premium on the few points that move you from a 3-point loss to a 3-point win and almost no weight on the many points that move you from a 20-point win to a 50-point win.

It is easily impressed by blowout victories - this system thinks a 50-point win and a 10-point loss is preferable to two 14-point wins. Most fans would disagree with that assessment.

It is slightly biased toward offensive-minded teams - because it considers point margins instead of point ratios, it treats a 50-30 win as more impressive than a 17-0 win. Again, this is an assessment that most fans would disagree with.

This should go without saying, but - I'll say it anyway. The system does not take into account injuries, weather conditions, yardage gained, the importance of the game, whether it was a Monday Night game or not, whether the quarterback's grandomother was sick, or anything else besides points scored and points allowed."

In any case, you're making all kinds of mistakes by thinking it means something when you use it to analyze past events.

[2ball]

Op likes getting beaten like a dead horse

[SouBeachTalents]

Op likes getting beaten like a dead horse

Or like Kawhi by 7'1 Windhorst

[light]

SRS is an old NFL statistic that people started using for the NBA. The creator of the stat says it's predictive and not retrodictive, meaning it's poor at analyzing what a team did in the past and is mostly useful for predicting what a team may do in the future.

SRS is a predictive system rather than a retrodictive system - this is a very important distinction. Some ratings try to answer the question: which team is stronger? I.e. which team is more likely to win a game tomorrow? Some ratings try to answer the question: which of these teams accomplished more in the past? The systems that answer the first questions more accurately are called predictive systems. The systems that answer the other questions more accurately are called retrodictive systems. As it turns out, SRS is a pretty good predictive system. For the reasons described below, SRS is not a good retrodictive system.

Retrodiction, noun, /ˌretrəˈdikSH(ə)n/: the explanation or interpretation of past actions or events inferred from the laws that are assumed to have governed them.

The creator of SRS continues about its drawbacks:

"It weights all games equally - every football fan knows that the Colts' week 17 game against Arizona was a meaningless exhibition, but the algorithm gives it the same weight as all the rest of the games.

It weights all points equally, and therefore ignores wins and losses - If you take away 10 points from the Colts in week 3 and give them back 10 points in week 4, you've just changed their record, but you haven't changed their rating at all. If you take away 10 points in week 3 and give back 20 points in week 4, you have made their record worse but their rating better. Most football fans put a high premium on the few points that move you from a 3-point loss to a 3-point win and almost no weight on the many points that move you from a 20-point win to a 50-point win.

It is easily impressed by blowout victories - this system thinks a 50-point win and a 10-point loss is preferable to two 14-point wins. Most fans would disagree with that assessment.

It is slightly biased toward offensive-minded teams - because it considers point margins instead of point ratios, it treats a 50-30 win as more impressive than a 17-0 win. Again, this is an assessment that most fans would disagree with.

This should go without saying, but - I'll say it anyway. The system does not take into account injuries, weather conditions, yardage gained, the importance of the game, whether it was a Monday Night game or not, whether the quarterback's grandomother was sick, or anything else besides points scored and points allowed."

In any case, you're making all kinds of mistakes by thinking it means something when you use it to analyze past events.

Just to piggyback on what I said here. A PSA:

When you look at older statistical systems like SRS you have to appreciate the fact that a lot of them (most of them?) were made for the betting community - people who are trying to figure out who's going to win the next game. They were less interested in interpreting past events because they already knew who won past games, and for developers there was no profit involved in developing statistical systems for understanding the past.

Even today franchises mostly want to understand what is happening now and what may happen in the future and they are far less interested (as in 100% disinterested) in understanding things like whether the 1989 Cavs would beat the 2012 Celtics, so modern statistical systems also lean predictive.

But knowing whether a system is predictive or retrodictive is obviously key.

SRS is predictive.

[TheCorporation]

Kawhi was the only one playing a super team Butler/Embiid/Simmons

Are you really trying to prop up his above average Game 7 2019 24.2 Game Score when literally 10 players have a Game 7 GameScore over 30? Seek help Math and numbers must hard for some people

[TheCorporation]

2013 spurs were overrated. Bunch of players past their prime or haven't hit their prime. They played Pau Gasol Lakers lol and then Marc Gasol grizzles. D'antoni coaching Dwight hahahah that's like a personal trainer dating a fat girl. And Dwight was washed up as a best player, never was a great one to begin with. They didn't have to face Durant either.

2008 Celtics you lost the damn series and arguably outplayed by Paul Pierce. Pierce/Butler are similar players as well in terms if impact. Imagine if Butler went off for 41 points and 73% TS? Nurse had Kawhi guard Butler in game 7.

Look at LeBron's Game 7 that year. That's a grown man Game 7. Kawhi is lacking

LBJ in 2008 Game 7 vs Boston: 45-5-6-2 on 48% (Boston #1 Defense,, #1 SRS rating, top 20 SRS all-time) You idiot
Kiwi in 2019 Game 7 vs 76ers: 41-8-3-3 on 41% (Philly #8 Defense, #11 SRS rating, not top 100 SRS all-time)