#SLOE: People's Basketball Sim League

The voter turnout for the conference semifinals wasn't great but the votes seem to indicate a clear result. Here are your conference finalists!

Western Conference
Golden State Warriors
Rik Smits C 21.2
Shawn Kemp PF 40.8
Cedric Ceballos SF 30.5
Reggie Lewis SG 24.5
Sam Cassell PG 19.8

VS

Sacramento Kings
Marcus Camby C 20.7
Karl Malone PF 42.4
Tracy McGrady SF 29.8
Stacey Augmon SG 34.6
Antonio Daniels PG 21.2

The Malone-Kemp match-up we've always wanted! The McGrady-Ceballos battle is also great. The real difference to me is at SG. Augmon seems to have a significant advantage here.

Eastern Conference

Milwaukee Bucks
Shaquille O'Neal C 31.4
Terry Catledge PF 22.5
Dominique Wilkins SF 28.8
Jalen Rose SG 31.2
Terrell Brandon PG 20.9

VS

Atlanta Hawks
Rik Smits C 25.8
Antonio McDyess PF 26.5
Grant Hill SF 22.7
Latrell Sprewell SG 26.7
Anfernee Hardaway PG 35.8

This is probably the most interesting match-up we've had so far so everyone better get out and vote!

All you guys need to know is this small stat:

Kings are 2-0 against warriors in playoffs, 1-0 in WCF.

Thank you

NOLa. wrote:All you guys need to know is this small stat:

Kings are 2-0 against warriors in playoffs, 1-0 in WCF.

Thank you

Malone put up 46 points and 11 rebounds per game on Kemp in that first WCF between us. My gosh. I have no problem losing to someone that OP

Bowtothebill23 wrote:

NOLa. wrote:All you guys need to know is this small stat:

Kings are 2-0 against warriors in playoffs, 1-0 in WCF.

Thank you

Malone put up 46 points and 11 rebounds per game on Kemp in that first WCF between us. My gosh. I have no problem losing to someone that OP

What about the other time you had Kemp and I didn't have Malone

Sent via Morse code

Meanwhile, he held Kemp to 23/10 on 45% shooting. Drew an average of over 4 fouls per game on Kemp.

NOLa. wrote:

Bowtothebill23 wrote:

NOLa. wrote:All you guys need to know is this small stat:

Kings are 2-0 against warriors in playoffs, 1-0 in WCF.

Thank you

Malone put up 46 points and 11 rebounds per game on Kemp in that first WCF between us. My gosh. I have no problem losing to someone that OP

What about the other time you had Kemp and I didn't have Malone

Sent via Morse code

1) You have Malone in this one.
2) Meh, that was an even series. You outscored me by a total of 1 point over the entire series and we each won a road game.

The goal of the game is to outscore your opponent. There is no threshold.

Took on Kemp twice and came out thw conqueror, making the Warriors thw vanquished

Sent via Morse code

Don't forget to vote. Pretty poor turnout so far.

It's too close to call so I'm extending the deadline.

kucoach7 wrote:It's too close to call so I'm extending the deadline.

7 to 4 is too close to call? Looks pretty clear to me.

Inner_GI wrote:

kucoach7 wrote:It's too close to call so I'm extending the deadline.

7 to 4 is too close to call? Looks pretty clear to me.

7 to 7 on Hawks vs Bucks

Bowtothebill23 wrote:

Inner_GI wrote:

kucoach7 wrote:It's too close to call so I'm extending the deadline.

7 to 4 is too close to call? Looks pretty clear to me.

7 to 7 on Hawks vs Bucks

ahhh very true.

In general, 7-4 is too close to call. Presuming a sample of 11 voters ij a larger population of voters, 5-6, 6-5 are as close to 50-50 as possible. When projecting, these are essentially 50-50. 7-4 is one vote from that. We can dig into the math, but in a 30 vote situation where it is truly 50-50, 7-4 can easily arise in a sample of 11, and that is why it is too close to call.

Math

Sent via Morse code

42PhD wrote:In general, 7-4 is too close to call. Presuming a sample of 11 voters ij a larger population of voters, 5-6, 6-5 are as close to 50-50 as possible. When projecting, these are essentially 50-50. 7-4 is one vote from that. We can dig into the math, but in a 30 vote situation where it is truly 50-50, 7-4 can easily arise in a sample of 11, and that is why it is too close to call.

News flash. We've never had all 30 gms participate in a vote once. Take your math and suck it.

Bye, doll


/sarcasm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Inner_GI wrote:

42PhD wrote:In general, 7-4 is too close to call. Presuming a sample of 11 voters ij a larger population of voters, 5-6, 6-5 are as close to 50-50 as possible. When projecting, these are essentially 50-50. 7-4 is one vote from that. We can dig into the math, but in a 30 vote situation where it is truly 50-50, 7-4 can easily arise in a sample of 11, and that is why it is too close to call.

News flash. We've never had all 30 gms participate in a vote once. Take your math and suck it.

Bye, doll


/sarcasm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That is kind of the point of small sample comment. This is really a 4 way vote, but I think not a 2-way, but the idea is still the same if looking for a majority since any vote can be considered against the field.

That said, let me know when you are sufficiently stretched to receive a private lesson, LA Woman.

Bucks take a 9-7 lead. I'm calling it. Congrats to the Bucks and Kings!

Kings ^


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TrayWithAnA wrote:Kings ^