I’m I the only one who’s surprised a 3-0 lead has never been blown before?
I mean it doesn’t sound like something THAT crazy, especially considering the large sample size of 3-0 leads in NBA history.
Those series became 3-0 for a reason. Usually only happens when there is a huge power imbalance like OKC-Suns this year so inferior team cant win 4 in a row.
It’s surprising a team’s best player hasn’t gotten injured and that’s why a team came back.
Or that their best player wasn’t already injured and they go up 3-0 anyway before the other team remembers how to play basketball.
That might be happening now
Thatsthejoke
That would be a funny joke.
Why am I crying then!?
No LeBron in the handle 😭
Thanks for explaining his comment
I read that as baseball first and LOL’d because I thought you were referencing Redsox, Yankees 2004. Then I realized that’s happening now.
I need another cup of coffee.
That sounds oddly specific
Butler went down vs the Celtics and the Celtics forced a game 7 vs the heat. Heat still won game , though.
Because Tatum also went down lol
I’ve thought about something like this being the reason an 8 seed could potentially win the Finals eventually. Superstar(s) go down early in the year, injury riddled team scraps their way to the 8 seed, superstars come back from injury and run the table.
Could’ve been the Celtics this year but they decided they would just go ahead and grab the 2 seed anyway lmao
This is why they built the play in round. To make sure Lebron, Steph, Giannis and super teams have a chance to claw their into the playoffs if injuries derail things early.
They basically manufactured it to try and get Zion into the playoffs during the bubble. It was popular enough that they added it permanently
No, they built the play in to fight tanking. It hasn’t worked, just like the current thing under consideration won’t work.
How can it not not work? The worst three teams have worse odds than 4-16.
Just FYI the Lakers have never benefited from the play-in despite playing in it 3 times. They would have been at the same position regardless.
So I do find it funny when people say the playin is for Bron when Bron hates it the most.
Kind of what happened with the 99 Knicks. Ewing and other injuries all year + strike shorted season made them an 8 seed that was far better than that. They pretty much steamrolled through the East once they pulled off a tight series against 1 seed Miami. Unfortunately, they faced an about to become dynasty San Antonio team.
It’s how I believed as a Toronto fan, the injury situation in the playoffs heavily contributed to our title run .
We’ve also seen multiple 8 seeds and play-in teams make the Finals and Conference Finals recently so it will probably happen eventually
Hell, we were essentially one potential Jokic injury away from a Heat-Lakers Finals where both teams would’ve been play-in teams
It’ll be pretty cool when a 6 seed wins it this year though, right?!?
…right..?
Something sort of like this happened in the Knicks’ 1999 Finals run as an 8 seed. Not a superstar missing most of the season and coming back for the playoffs, but they had some major trades in the offseason and the season itself was shortened by the lockout, so they struggled to find the right chemistry during the 50-game season and finished 8th. Ewing actually became increasingly unavailable in the playoffs due to injury which forced the team to find a new identity more oriented around fast breaks using their key new players, Latrell Sprewell and Marcus Camby. However, Ewing played a key role in their upset of Alonzo Mourning’s #1 seed Heat in the first round, and they sorely missed his presence in the Finals against the Robinson-Duncan lineup.
Anyway, had the season been longer, they likely would have found their chemistry earlier and not finished 8th (they finished the 50-game season winning 6 of their last 8), and had Ewing not gone down they might not have leaned as much into a new team identity which helped them advance past the Pacers in the ECF.
Something sort of like this happened in the Knicks’ 1999 Finals run as an 8 seed.
Fun fact - the 1999 Knicks are the only 8-seed who ever pulled off a sweep in the playoffs. It took them all five games to get past the Heat in Round 1, but then they swept the Hawks in Round 2.
They were a 6 seed but this is more or less what happened with Hakeem’s Rockets second title. Lots of early season injuries then the adjustment period after the Drexler trade created a 6 seed in name only squad.
I honestly think if Tatum didn’t get hurt in the heat series that Boston would have done it against the heat back in 2023
Even last year, Jimmy Butler literally lost 4 games in a row and got swept by the Wolves after Steph got injured in Game 1. He would’ve absolutely been the first (and probably only) player and team in NBA history to blow a 3-0 series lead, especially with the way he played in that series after Game 3.
It almost happened a couple of years ago, when the Heat almost threw against the Celtics. But Cs didn’t feel like inferior team, they just fucked up a lot early in the series.
Even then, for the first 3 games of that series, it looked like the Heat were the better team during the series and had the Celtics starters seeing ghosts on the bench at the end of Game 3. I don’t know what happened or changed starting in Game 4 though.
Literally just shooting variance
Gabe and Strus were generational that series
Shit Caleb Martin was. 19.3 points on 73% TS. With amazing defense on Jaylen Brown.
Should have been given MVP of the conference finals IMO.
I think it could’ve went either way. Jimmy doing what he was doing on a severely sprained ankle was pretty damn good too. 24-7-6. 3-1 assist to turnover ratio. More steals than turnovers.
Yeah - NBA fandom really seems far too oblivious to shooting variance. 9 times out of 10 it’s the reason for an underdog winning a game - either the better team shot cold or the lesser team shot hot, or both. People bend over backwards to come up with narratives but it’s usually about 3-point shooting in the end.
And it’s just as true in the playoffs. 3-point shooting in the two games Boston lost to Philly - 26% vs 49%, and 28% vs 36%.
3-point shooting in the three games the Celtics won - 36% to 17%, 43% to 34%, and 45% to 30%.
This is the modern NBA in a nutshell.
That series was so infuriating. It felt like Miami’s strategy was basically “maybe if a bunch of mediocre 3 point shooters can get hot at the exact same time we have a chance” and they somehow pulled that off like 5 times in one series.
I think it was game 6 were Boston shot 20% from 3 and Miami shot like 47% from 3 and Boston still won which I think pretty well sums it up.
Miami didn’t look like the better team - they just couldn’t miss a shot.
Miami shot 52% from 3 in Game 1 and 54% in game 3. That wasn’t talent or defensive scheme, that was variance.
you don’t win a seven game series on shooting variance alone. Just calling it variance also disregards the fact that you shoot worse when you’re gassed and if you’re getting cooked on defense or can’t keep up with the other team you’re going to get tired and your legs will not let you shoot efficiently. Not to mention, I think its really unlikely that Miami shot in the 52-54% range without having some advantage play that generated quality shots. Were they really shooting that percentage on heat checks alone? I find that unlikely
I think its pretty reductive to say that Miami had no schematic influence on winning that series. You don’t beat the former champions with good shooting luck alone
It definitely wasn’t *just* shooting variance, the Heat were good and Spo is a genius. But IIRC Thinking Basketball did an analysis showing it was one of the most outlier shooting performances *ever*. It definitely played a big part.
Thinking basketball did an episode about that series. Mainly talked about shooting luck and they concluded that based on Miami’s shot quality and regular season averages, they outperformed their expected level so much it was like they started games up 14-0. They were +21% on wide open 3s and +8% on open 3s that series vs their regular season averages.
I didn’t think that at all. Gabe Vincent and Caleb Martin together played the absolute best basketball of their careers. I went into the next season thinking those guys took a leap and would be in the upper echelon of role players lmao. Now both of them averaged less than 4 points this season.
It’s an excuse/salt, but I think the point still stands. Caleb especially was incredible that series. Also, it was Joe’s 1st year as coach. He was _rough_ and was outcoached heavily by Spo
Cs were probably the better team overall. Miami just outplayed them in that series and we’re all a decent matchup for them. I remember at the time when Miami was up 3-1 it felt like of there was ever a team to blow a 3-0 lead it would probably be a lower seed like Miami who somehow went up 3-0 on a way higher seed.
It was streaky shooting by both teams that got the Heat that 3-0 lead. From 3, the Heat shot 52% in game 1, 35% in game 2, and 54% in game 3, while the Celticsshot 35%, 29%, and 26% in those games. The Celtics outshot the Heat from 3 in games 4 and 5, but game 6 was back to hot shooting for the Heat at 47%, however the Celtics, courtesy of Derrick White, stole that game in Miami. Tatum’s injury ruined a potentially great game 7.
ESPN analytics had Celtics winning that series at 75% when it was 3-0 if I remember correctly
That can’t be real. There is no way any analytics group says a team is going to reverse sweep at 3-0 in the NBA playoffs, no matter how big a seeding difference there is.
I genuinely don’t think it will ever happen because that felt like the perfect situation for it to occur and the Celtics still lost Game 7 at home
Because tatum got injured at the beginning of the game lol
60% of the 3-0 series end up in four games, which does suggest that the chances of the losing team were never high.
Still, with 30% winning one game, 7% winning two games, and 2.5% (four teams in history) winning three games, it does suggest pretty clearly that the losing team has generally around 30% to win any given game.
So, if I were to bet without knowing the outcomes, I would bet that out of 160 times in history, it would happen one time that a team got back from the 3-0. While also acknowledging that 0 times (or 2 times) would be quite likely. The average what you’d expect statistically is almost 1.3 times. Again, that’s playing it safe. So statistically it “should” have happened at least once, but zero is not far from the expected outcome. Something 30%-likely happening four times in a row is just very unlikely.
As a Lakers fan and former statistician. Fuck you
Great analysis and good to know we’re due for one, sorry LA
Man I’m already tired of the coming discourse about LeBron’s legacy being tarnished.
According to statistics, you don’t become due for a win until the fans are ready for it.
Part of what makes it more complicated is that you can’t compute the odds in the usual way, which assumes individual outcomes are statistically independent, because game outcomes in the playoffs are not really independent. Teams study each other and continuously adjust their strategies. A team down 0-3 likely makes several key adjustments (even if they’re not completely obvious to the casual viewer) to claw their way back into the series, and the leading team in turn can make counter-adjustments that make it more unlikely that the losing team will be able to pull off upset wins 4 times in a row.
I think this is especially true in basketball where there is so much room for nuance and adjustment in strategy, more so than a sport like e.g. baseball, where a comeback from down 0-3 has indeed occurred.
Yeah, 0 is part of the expected outcomes with a mean result of 1.3 in NBA history. Any given series that starts 3-0 has a probability of 0.8% for the trailing team to win. This is not that far off from the odds for a given 16 seed to beat a given 1 seed in the NCAA tournament (estimated at 1.2-1.3 %) and those outcomes are 158-2.
It has happened in the NHL a few times, and it comes down to the much lower scoring. It means that teams can get to that 3-0 without being all that dominant in the first place with some lucky bounces. IIRC the NHL also has far more 3-1 comebacks
In basketball the better team has more opportunity to demonstrate that, over and over. There’s so many chances to score that it becomes less random
Also the two successful comebacks that jump to mind (Flyers in 2010 and Kings 2014) were catalyzed by injury, and hockey being a contact sport has a vehicle to more reliably deliver those injuries.
This is the most important point by far. It is very difficult to win four in a row against a bad team; it is basically unfathomable for a team to win four in a row against a superior more talented team, and like you said…the large majority of 3-0 series are let by the far superior team. The Lakers rockets series is a historical outlier. The only fairly recent similar example I can think of is when the heat went up on the Celtics a few years ago when the Celtics were probably the better team. And the Celtics did end up coming back and taking that 7.
But I would imagine that if I went through the NBA history of every 3-0 series, The large majority would be like OKC-PHX, not Heat-Celtics or Lakers-Rockets
For sure. But momentum is everything in a Playoff series. How many times have we seen one team dominate, and even the eye test showed they were clearly the better team, but then the other team wins a game, and then the next, and all of a sudden they look unstoppable and like they’re going to win the series.
I still remember the 2005 NBA Finals, where the teams traded home blowouts for the first 4 games. I remember being giddy after the first two games and disconsolate after the Spurs lost Game 4 by 31 points.
Game Date Road team Result Home team Game 1 June 9 Detroit Pistons 69–84 (0–1) San Antonio Spurs Game 2 June 12 Detroit Pistons 76–97 (0–2) San Antonio Spurs Game 3 June 14 San Antonio Spurs 79–96 (2–1) Detroit Pistons Game 4 June 16 San Antonio Spurs 71–102 (2–2) Detroit Pistons Game 5 June 19 San Antonio Spurs 96–95(OT)(3–2) Detroit Pistons Game 6 June 21 Detroit Pistons 95–86 (3–3) San Antonio Spurs Game 7 June 23 Detroit Pistons 74–81 (3–4) San Antonio Spurs
That G5 is the Horry game winner isn’t it 😅
Yes. Horry went off in the 4th quarter and OT and hit a 3 for the win.
couple years ago that was Den-Min every single game
Not only that, is the playoffs so a team who has flaws get exposed real hard as opponents will keep exploiting these flaws as long as it works.
Huge power imbalance + attacking weaknesses = sweep.
Feels like this Houston-Lakers series could legitimately be our first case. Without Luka and a not-100%-AR one could argue Houston really is the better team. It’s no surprise they have been the betting favorites in every game this series. Were it not for a completely ridiculous collapse by Houston in Game 3 this series would be 3-2 in favor of the Rockets.
Lakers were the betting favorite yesterday
there have been PLENTY of 3-0s where the teams are close in skill but 1 team just barely wins 3 times in a row.
The only way it’s happening is if a superstar gets hurt game 3 and is out.
It’s happened 4 times in hockey and never once in the nba. I think OP is right and that warrants a discussion around why that is. ur entire point is “cuz the other team is better”. like yeah dude.. sure, it became 3-0 for a reason but also a team can have 3 bad shooting nights in a row and then turn it around. I also think its really weird that never once in 75 years did this end up happening lol.
Probabilities say that it should’ve happened by now, but basketball is an inherently low-variance game compared to most sports because of how much scoring happens that, as others have said, it’s rare that two teams of even relatively equal strength get to a point where one of them wins the first three games without winning one more. Even in the Rockets/Laker series, the Rockets were 30 seconds away from making it 2-1 instead of 3-0.
And going down 3-0 leaves zero margin for error to the point that something like a sprained ankle like in a 2023 BOS/MIA ECF (a theoretical series where an inferior team was up 3-0 based on quality of talent) can be too much to overcome.
I really thought Boston was going to be the first a couple of years ago vs Miami.
Tatum getting hurt on the literal first possession of the game was such insanely bad luck
Sucked the life right out of the team.
Yeah, they were the more talented team and had all the momentum in the world. If Tatum doesn’t get hurt I don’t see how they lose Game 7.
But why were they down 3-0 though?
Because Miami had one of the greatest magnet balls of all time relative to their regular season performance that series
Caleb Martin still haunts my dreams
They had the highest wide open three make percentage in a single series by hitting them at a 58% rate.
Miami shot outrageously better than normal in that entire series. It was an insanely unsustainable performance where every single shot that could have gone either way went in. By the numbers it’s one of the greatest statistical anomalies ever in the sport.
Well wouldn’t have even been a game 7 if not for a miracle by that balding mf derrick white.
That’s the moment that gave us the sad Bill Simmons meme
Thank god we weren’t. The anxiety goes through the roof after losing game 5 and continues after game 6 and leading up to game 7. I’m so invested that I was “off” for almost a week each time according to my wife. I experienced it twice in a year. The Heat in the 2023 ECF, as you mentioned, and the Panthers in the 2024 SCF. I hope for the Lakers and their fans that they finish it in game 6. I wouldn’t wish that feeling on anyone.
Bro that Derrick White putback at the buzzer in game 6 might be the most devastated I’ve ever been with regards to sports and it was mostly due to the potential of being the first ever to blow 3-0
While still a very memorable play, it would’ve been an all timer if we would’ve lost game 7. I remember thinking we had won, the graphic even said we won 4-2, after Smart took that shot and it took a pretty high bounce I thought for sure there wasn’t enough time for White to tip it in. Then when they showed the replay and I saw the ball out of his hand a frame before the buzzer went off , I literally fell on my knees and yelled. My wife came in and asked me “what’s wrong” and I just hugged her. She thought I was crazy.
Dude I was watching the game on my phone at someone’s birthday party. It was incredibly rude but I had to drive my gf there at the time. When White made the putback I felt like I had witnessed a miracle, food had flavor, life had meaning. Then Tatum falls in G7 and I would have greeted seppuku warmly.
Crazy series
There’s something about having such a deep seeded rooting interest in a team, that you experience all these extreme highs and lows. It sucks sometimes, but it can be wonderful!
I wouldn’t give it up for anything. Fuck the Heat, but you? You’re alright man.
Sports man…
Man I felt physically sick the whole day after that, I could not wait for game 7 to get it over with
Same. Game 7 being a blowout was incredibly cathartic. If it was a close game, the stress and anxiety levels would’ve been off the fucking charts.
The Celtics were ass for the first three games of that series (and Caleb Martin was amazing), but it really looked like they were about to be the first and may have if Tatum didn’t sprain his ankle in the opening moments of the game and Brown didn’t put on one of the worst dribbling/ball handling displays in the history of basketball
We can debate it now cause my guy took a leap, but people who thought JB was better in 2023 (looking at you Brandon Jennings) were crazy. He came out recently and said his left wrist was injured for ~3 years after the surgery he had in 21. That game 7 was rough lol
“Probabilities say that it should’ve happened by now”
You’re assuming there’s a 50⁄50 chance of any team winning. We can’t actually calculate the probability of something like this because we don’t know the odds on each game although we could use gambling odds to get a close approximation.
What if you add Kurt Angle to the mix
I’m beginning to think this guy didn’t actually calculate any probabilities
I mean a lot of it is also just how we’re defining probabilities. Something to the effect of Bertrand’s paradox–there’s no single correct interpretation of the statement, “What are the chances that this team wins this basketball game?”
This is a great point. It’s obviously still very rare in hockey (four times), but it makes sense that it would happen there far more often, since a hot goalie can dominate a series in a way other positions cannot in basketball and baseball, it’s comparatively low scoring, and you have real variability in the scores. If pitchers could pitch four straight complete games that would probably shake things up.
In the NBA it probably would require something extremely specific like Hakeem getting hurt after game 3 with the Magic.
Yea having 100+ possessions in a game makes for much less variance than football or baseball where it’s like 20
I’m not sure I agree basketball is a lower variance sport at all. three point shooting creates a hot-or-cold variable the likes of which none of the other big 4 sports have. it also negates superior size and strength in a way football, at least, cannot. I could see an argument for baseball being more high variance but there is a reason why double-digit seeds from mid-major leagues win multiple times every NCAA tournament and the very best of the NCAA group of 5 teams get waxed by the 5th and 6th best team in the NCAAF playoffs
How many teams managed to force Game 7 besides Miami?
The Trailblazers did it against the Mavs back in ‘03. I remember thinking if there ever was going to be a team to blow a 3-0 lead, it would’ve been those Mavs teams lol.
Lol definitely; those Mavs teams could create and blow 20-point leads almost instantaneously
Yeah there was a feeling those Dirk-led Mavs teams would never win a chip, which made 2011 so much fucking sweeter.
I really thought they would in 2003 before Dirk got hurt
Hell yeah that team was legit. I liked that team more than the 06 and 07 teams for sure.
All it takes is 1
🙏🏻and I will die in peace knowing we at least got that one.
This is the 2026 Denver Nuggets
That run was crazy. Them and the Webber kings could be at 84 by halftime.
What would the modern equivalent be, just in raw point diff. Like 30+? 33?
Both those teams were way ahead of their time and would feast in the current NBA
It was very close to happening in 2006. Dallas was a possession away from going up 3-0 in a series where Miami then ended up winning four in a row.
It was also close in the Celtics-Heat series a few years ago (I believe 2023 Conference finals), only for Jaylen brown to forget he had a left hand and the heat taking that deries and Caleb Martin suddenly being of GOAT descent for a series.
Honestly didn’t think the heat would win that series after going 7, being the 8th seed and all.
Celtics. Against Miami
If Tatum doesn’t roll his ankle we had that shit locked up man. The vibes were immaculate.
I think the statistic they put up was 4 teams have forced game 7
I think Boston was the only team to force game 7 but then they ultimately lost
Four of them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_that_have_overcome_3%E2%80%930_series_deficits#Unsuccessful_comebacks_3
Nice find
After being the first 8 seed to beat a 1 the 94 Nuggets forced a game 7 against the Jazz after going down 0-3.
The Blazers vs the Mavericks in 2003 first round, and the Royals vs the Lakers in the 1951 NBA Finals
Boston also forced a game 7 and won it after being down 3-0 against NY.
2004 AL Championship with the Red Sox and Yankees. The Red Sox went onto win the World Series.
Don’t erase my stress-fest from Mavs-Blazers round 1 in 2003
Don’t forget the epic Portland vs Mavs Game 7. I think that occurred in 2003
Only 4. Blazers in ‘03 were the closest to winning as they had a lead very late.
Magic forced a game 7 in round 1 of the playoffs against the eventual champion Pistons if i remember correctly in 2004
Seems like something Doc Rivers would have done at least twice.
I’m sure he already has a list of excuses prepared on why that’s everybody else’s fault and not him.
No one was giving him enough credit for being up 3 games in the first place
“Paul stole KG’s onion rings. It killed all the chemistry”
“That shit was not my fault. Y’all are trash.”
It was either the equipment manager or caterer.
“Google me!”
Can’t blow a 3-0 lead if you blow one of the first 3 games of the series taps forehead
Fortunately he still has time
give him time - lots of head coach openings this summer
That would require his team to take a 3-0 lead in a playoff series which never happens because he’s the head coach
Basketball is the sport with the least amount of variance. If a team goes up 3-0, they are likely just significantly better. Many of the teams who went down 3-0 simply had very little chance of coming close to winning the series from the outset. Teams that were sizable underdogs before the start of a series like the Lakers were in this series generally do not ever go up 3-0 against the team they are playing. This is a rather unique situation (and the Lakers could still win).
If two equal teams play (where each game is a coin flip), there is a 1⁄4 chance that a team goes up 3-0. The only possibilities are 3-0 or 2-1 after 3 games (since it doesn’t matter which tram is the one that’s up).
Don’t have to be significantly better to go up 3-0.
That’s true for an either team case, and then the odds become 6.25% for the team down 3-0 to win the series
Definitely low, but crazy it hasn’t happened yet. Team morale down 3-0 is also an X factor
It’s so crazy to me. I feel like the Rockets have the better roster, but the Lakers have been overperforming and Playoff LeBron wasn’t fucking around the first few games. Could totally see him being tired and the others regressing enough for the Rockets to make history.
If Lebron blows a 3-0 lead you know everyone will hold that against him forever.
LeBlown lead, LeChoke, etc. Nicknames would go crazy and the RDC skit even crazier.
I’m an lakers fan first, but I am so very much not in the mood for the infantile drudgery that this sub and other social mediums will regurgitate.
Ya itll be quite funny to hear lebron haters use him blowing a 3-0 lead at 41 with two injured star players as some kind of stain on his legacy lmfao
You’re watching the modern NBA, 3-point shot making is not even remotely close to what is now from back then. 15+ point leads used to be incredibly difficult to overcome in a few minutes so a 3-0 series lead was just too much.
It’s gonna happen in this era or in the future though. Offense has been solved and defenses cannot keep up unless the refs start wilding out.
I’m deeply confused by all these takes when it’s pretty blatant. Beating a team 4 times in a row that somehow managed to beat you 3, in a 2 week span is incredibly hard. Barring injury, it almost is crazy.
It’s only happened 4 times in 130 years of NHL playoffs.
Only once in 140?+ Years of MLB playoffs
Sports where the score is regularly 3-2
Not hard to imagine why the best team tends to win when you have 48 minutes to score more than 40 baskets
2004 ALCS, Boston vs New York
Best series I’ve ever witnessed in my life and nothing will ever top the magic that happened in those games.
You’re gonna get a series eventually where it does just come down to injury. The Denver-Minnesota series easily could have worked out this way had the Wolves won game 1. They are exponentially better than Denver, but Denver is going to win because Minnesota lost their all NBA guard (and his backcourt mate).
You’re right that it’s gonna be rare. But eventually a superstar is gonna get injured up 3-0 and the series will flip.
That’s how I’ve always seen it.
If a team is good enough to beat you 3 times in a row, it’s generally good enough not to lose to you 4 times in a row.
Even in the Rockets Lakers game last night, at one point in the first half the Lakers were up by 12 and within like 5-6 minutes the Rockets were up by like 11. Back in day, it felt like being down 12 was almost insurmountable.
Think of it this way, in order to come back from down 0-3 you have to sweep the other team.
How common is a sweep? Especially by a team that is likely much worse than the leading team? Not to mention momentum and fatigue.
The only time I would expect it of is there was a major injury or recovery from a major injury.
If you are a top 4 seeded playoff team, chances are you didn’t go on a 4 game losing streak all season. Chances are you have among the better coaches in the league that can make adjustments quarter to quarter instead of game to game or series to series. Chances are you have a high profile all star that can on most given nights will the team to a victory if things aren’t working out for the team as a while.
If you are a bottom 4 seeded playoff team, chances are you have gone on a 4+ game losing streak this season. Chances are your coach is not as good as one of the top 4 seeded teams. Chances are your players are working off of a system where if one piece fails the rest crumbles soon after.
Then you need to lose 3 games in a row then win 4 straight with all that stacked up against you It’s just one of those “if you think about it for about 120 seconds it kind of becomes obvious” sort of things.
Why do you split it between the top 4 and bottom 4 in the playoffs?
The difference between the #4 and #5 seeds is usually negligible, and historically the #6 seeds have been competitive with the #3 seeds, even having better records than them (before the seeding rules changed).
Just for the sake of how pretty much every sweep has ever occurred. I am not going to bother looking at the numbers but it should not be a hot take to guess that 7 and 8 seeds get swept a lot more than 3 or 4 seeds. And we’re in the first round where 3-0 leads are far more common explicitly because those worse teams are automatically matched up against higher seeds.
Once again, “if you think about it for 120 seconds it kind of becomes obvious.”
I’m shocked that there aren’t more due to injuries. We better not get slandered in the future.
This series was 3-1 not 3-0
This comment section showing the nba fans frequenting know almost no bball history. Shit should be common knowledge to most mildly invented fans and the only time it happened in baseball was when the Red Sox came back down 0-3 on the Yankees and went on to win the World Series the same here. Helps reinforce a comeback like that when you win so for those that didn’t pay attention to sports history if it happens and the team doesn’t go on to win the Sox would hold that.
Don’t know much about hockey though fairly certain it has happened a few times thwres
“Don’t know much about hockey though fairly certain it has happened a few times thwres”
Arguably the most notable in recent times was also Boston based lol. Bruins/Flyers in the 2010 Eastern Conference Final. Bruins up 3-0, Flyers came back and forced a game 7 in Boston. Bruins went up 3-0 in the first and blew it, losing the game and the series 4-3.
I feel like it’s inevitable that it’ll happen in this era, I mean we are closer than ever since the game became much more volatile with all the three point shooting and fast pace.
We hear it all the time how teams lost because they had “bad shooting nights”. It became main factor whether you win or lose.
When your gameplan is just hoping for the shots the fall, 3 or 4 bad shooting nights are not that impossible anymore.
While it wasnt a 3-0 lead thats why I think Philly has a better than decent shot to win their series. The Cs chuck and duck strategy might win a lot in January or w/e but April-May is a whole different animal.
My thoughs exactly. Defend the perimeter well and Celtics are clueless on every possesion 😂
they won 2 years ago with the same philosophy, maybe they had more talent back then but they have a proven game plan lol
Both volatility and injuries are higher. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to see a 3-0 team taken down by a few key injuries in the next few years.
Celtics in 2023 were the best recipe to make it happen. A superior team drops 3 games they shouldn’t and then they wake up. But winning 4 in a row isn’t easy, and a team that good usually doesn’t go down that bad. Just a weird scenario that is tough to occur
Also almost shaping up to be story book with d white’s clutch layup to send it to game 7.
Game 7 was also at home for Celtics. If only Tatum didn’t get injured in Q1 who knows that could’ve been the first 3-0 comeback.
Just because it was so hype: https://youtu.be/ASsKgkBsQs4?si=2Ct43XVlpx5gpsip
Wait are you jinxing the Lakers?
OP a witch?
it’s bound to happen this generation with the amount of 3s you can drain. Houston had a good night from 3 yesterday and they destroyed the Lakers on that end; on the other side, lakers struggled more than normal from 3. I think Kennard didn’t make a 3, Lebron was 0/6 from 3, etc.
So it can happen, if games like that happen in serie, but it’s highly unlikely because that can happen also to the team which only needs one more game.
Also Amen hit 2 of them. He’s a 20% 3-point shooter
Honestly I’m surprised too, not sure why everyone else thinks this is expected. Think about how many 3-0 series scores has happened in NBA history, surely at least one of them shouldve been a comeback win.
Think about this scenario where there’s two evenly matched teams, with 50-50 chance of winning. Assume team 1 wins the first 3 games in a row, which is not that unreasonable. Then it should be not out of the realm of possible for team 2 to win 4 in a row, given that it’s a 50-50 matchup.
Also worth noting that the first round has only been a 7 game series for 20 years or so. From 1984-2002 the first round was a 5 game series.
I don’t think it’s that significant because there are other rounds too, and 20 years is still a lot of data.
It’s 3-0 because one team is substantially better. Now you’re asking that substantially inferior team to win four games in a row. It ain’t happening.
Unless you consider weird injuries like Luka, AR and KD. No way should the Lakers have been up 3-0. The Rockets blew game 3. So it wouldn’t be that weird if the Rockets win Game 6 at home and KD gives you a 50 piece in Game 7.
I am especially with the prospect of star players on the leading team getting injured. To me it’s one of the most mind blowing basketball stats. I believe it’s happened 5 times in hockey.
4 times in the history of the NHL has a best of 7 playoff series had one team go down 0-3, only for the other team to win 4 in a row and win the series.
1942 – Toronto Maple Leafs vs. Detroit Red Wings (Stanley Cup Final) 1975 – New York Islanders vs. Pittsburgh Penguins (Quarterfinals) 2010 – Philadelphia Flyers vs. Boston Bruins (Eastern Conference Semifinals) 2014 – Los Angeles Kings vs. San Jose Sharks (First Round)
I think it would have absolutely happened in 2023 if Tatum didn’t turn his ankle in game 7
We were one Jayson Tatum injury in the first minute away from it happening tbh
I swear it would’ve happened a couple years ago if Tatum didn’t get hurt against Miami :(
Maybe if we give Doc another chance he can pull it off.
The best team almost always wins in basketball. Nowhere close the randomness as in an individual hockey or baseball game.
T-Wolves-Nuggets is representing a very clear exception.
If LeBron is the first, how does that impact his legacy?
It will negatively impact his legacy in the eyes of stupid people.
Baseball MLB is like twice as old and it’s only happened once there. ‘04 Red Sox came back on the Yankees.
Baseball doesn’t have 7 game series every round tho. And way fewer teams even make the playoffs
The crazy part of trying to come back from being down 0-3 is that you have to go on a 4 game streak, effectively a sweep immediately after nearly getting swept. Overcoming the gaps that resulted in 3 losses is, obviously, unlikely. Then add to that overcoming loss of morale & momentum, decreases in stamina, additional travel, and probably injuries. It takes a lot out of any team to play a 7 game series, and loading all your successes into the back half is ROUGH.
Lots of people in this sub who haven’t been blown before.
Nope. I’ve watched a lot of basketball.
It also wasn’t a thing that ever happened in baseball until 2004, and never again.
4 times in hockey though
Beating a good team 4 times in a row is tough shit
Probably.
It takes a hell of a lot to go up 3-0.
Usually just a hell of a talent gap (like the Thunder vs Suns.) Sometimes there are massive injuries as well.
And, frankly, human nature. Once you are down 0-3, it’s easy to mentally check out.
Now, the Lakers 3-0 lead? Different than most. Really never should have been 3-0. The Lakers won Game 3 after trailing by six or more points with under 30 seconds to go. How rare is that? Teams had won one of the prior 1,714 examples of that.
On top of that, because of the Luka and Reaves injuries, Year 23 LeBron James had to play HEAVY minutes and exert a ton of energy in the first three games. It’s just not realistic for him to carry a team during an entire series anymore. LeBron as the third option? That’s what made the Lakers an interesting Finals story. But, the man is just tiring out.
STILL, Houston has to win two more games. Including Game 7 in LA.
I do know who is LOVING the LA/Houston series going at least six.
The Lakers without Luka? The Rockets with or without KD?
It’s lookin like another sweep for the Thunder.
Unlike hockey or baseball, there is a lot less variation in play for 2 teams. Baseball could be some lucky/unlucky at bats, hockey is swung by goalies all the time. With the increasing 3 point shots, I would expect eventually some series to be decided by a wild swing in percentage, but usually those changes seem to be over longer stretches throughout the season.
While baseball is the most solved game in terms of predictability on a per possession basis, basketball has the most scoring possessions per possession of any sport other than cricket. That means that, in the long run, the teams that are more likely to score or more likely to stop will hold out. In statistical terms, the variance is low. Over the course of a 7 game series the better team almost always wins. Barring injury there are very very very few cases where there’s even an argument that the worse team won. The 3 point era has increased the variance on a per possession basis a little bit which in turn has increased the per game variance as well. That’s why there’s been more 3-1 leads blown in recent years.
We’re so fucked. Lakers are giving off the energy that they will blow this.
You have to both be good enough to win 3 straight but then have a collapse big enough to lose 4 straight.
Outside of something crazy, like a team’s best player coming back for game 4 and the other team’s best playing getting injured in game 4 it’s just such a highly unrealistic concept.
In a one off even a worse team can beat a better team. But over a series? The talent really matters in the NBA.
Celtics almost did it a few years back, if Tatum did get injured in game 7 they might have beat the Heat to then lose to the Nuggets
NBA is the least random of the major sports due to the high scoring. Unless there is a major change (like with the wolves getting injured), you would expect the better team to win 1 of 4 games.
Rivers came so close to being that guy