homegame

Time Series Analysis: NBA Version

Due to the wisdom of David Stern, the NBA Finals won't start for another five hours, and I'm sick of hearing about the event already. Fortunately, by the end of Sunday night, I won't have to think about the Finals if I don't want to.

The Finals, thanks to the early Stern brainstorm of the 2-3-2 home court format, is a very front-loaded event. Simply put, if the Lakers are up 2-0 after Game Two, they'll have about an 80 percent chance of winning the series. If the Celtics are tied or, of course, up 2-0 themselves, I'd make their chances of victory at over 80 percent -- maybe a lot over.

The 2-3-2 was initiated in 1985 as a cost-control measure. Since the Lakers got the first three game home stand, there were no complaints. I well remember sitting by a pool in LA between Games Three and Four of that series when USA Today sportswriter Steve Hershey proposed that whenever the Lakers were in the Finals, the format should be 1-5-1 for them.

But in truth, as 25 years of history has revealed, the 2-3-2 both puts more pressure on and offers a much bigger reward for the home team in those first two games. It's simple. Go up 2-0 and no matter what else happens, you CANNOT face an elimination road game. The other guys now have essentially three must-win games in a row. Home court advantage or no, that's an almost impossible feat. In fact, no team in Finals history has ever held serve in those three home games. The only Finals which have ended in five games (there have only been three), ended with a road victory by the champs. Two of them were road sweeps.

While plenty of teams have won Finals without having home court advantage, they did so by earning at least a split of games One and Two. Only one team, the 2006 Mavericks, has ever won the opening two at home and gone on to lose a Finals. One out of 25 is four percent. Those are not good odds.

The 2-3-2 format is a very minor systemic advantage. But it is indeed home-court advantage plus. In a series between evenly matched opponents (which most Finals are) both playing at roughly the same level (which most Finals are not), it offers the team with the better regular season record a chance to put their opponent down early. Being behind for an entire week is mentally fatiguing. The 2006 Heat are to be commended for their poise and discipline.

Now that I've said that, let me add that I don't think the 2-3-2 will effect the 2010 Finals in the slightest. The Celtics and Lakers are changed teams than when they last met in 2008. But they haven't changed that much. The 2008 series was a relatively easy and uncompetitive Boston win. Basically, the Celts never trailed.

No matter how many games it lasts, it would surprise me if this Finals were much different.

posted by Michael Gee @ 2:57 PM