That's why they play the game. No shit! Because we can talk til we're blue in the face who the better team is, but if the result of the game doesn't fucking matter, then it's just two peoples opinions. Quantifiable evidence like an ending score is a pretty good start. What else are we supposed to use to determine who…

"You're falling back on the same conclusion based on an illogical premise: that the better team won..."

I remember when the Pistons beat the Lakers in the 04 finals and Stern slapped a big ol asterisk on the LOB trophy because, I mean, c'mon? The Pistons beat a team with Kobe, The Glove, AND Karl Malone?! That just doesn't feel right, y'know? There wasn't even a superstar on that team! Our friend here must have been…

So when do you exactly decide who the better team is? Before they play? After? during the game(s)? Is there a list you can point me to that has all of the teams who didnt win but were the better team? That list full of asterisked games has to exist somewhere if this is such a widely held belief.

good god man. you're the most insufferable sack of shit on the face of the planet. I hope you don't try this bullshit when you play a pick up game or monopoly. Quit trying to lecture me on sports. Your whole view is completely out of wack. You're arguing that basketball and other sports are subjective. There are no…

oh, so now regular season wins are a legitimate defense of who the better team is? I thought that was completely arbitrary up thread.

your name is so fitting for that joke...

W/L record in a series is a stat. And provide me an example of a team who has won a best of 7 series who wasn't better than their opponent. You're calling my reasoning faulty, but your argument boils down to "cuz I said so" so I think I'm going to respectfully disagree.

nope. I'm actually a nugget fan.

Well, that's not a metric. And something tells me you get a boner for the bcs cuz it's completely arbitrary, like your value judgment based sports analysis.

I'm gonna go ahead and say that we are going to have to disagree. You're basing this off of your "feels" because you aren't able to provide me with any evidence that the spurs were better. I've asked for this advance metric. I've provided a pretty telling stat that is good enough for like 99.6% of the world. my work…

what metric?! Tell me. I'm begging you.

once again, you're simplifying what I said. Yeah, they won game 6. They also won 3 other games that series which happens to be 1 more than the spurs won. So that sample size is big enough for me, the NBA, and the world at large to determine that the heat were better. Why that's not enough for you, I have no idea.

You keep using the word logic and I'm not entirely sure you know what it means. You're basing who the "better" team is based on some arbitrary feeling that you and only you are able to identify. The rest of the world lets the series plays out and the eventual winner is the better team. That's how it works.

what in the fuck are you using to judge who the better team is? I'm intrigued.

How in the fuck is that an illogical premise?! They won 4 out of 7 games! That should be the end of the argument.

So if the spurs win in 7 you'll say the heat are the better team, right? By your own pretzel logic, that's how this works. I think.

how in the flying fuck does the playoff format or home court advantage this year have any bearing on the finals last year?

no, my argument was that the series didn't hinge on one play that happened in game 6. If the spurs truly were that much better, they should have closed out game 6 or taken care of business in game 7. The better team won. I don't know why it's so hard to admit that.

What about a team that wins the last two games of a series? I don't think there's a way to oversimplify that, but my guess is you'll find some way to discredit that too.