Heard this argument on wfan yesterday... | The Boneyard

Heard this argument on wfan yesterday...

Jaydumo20

Jaydumo20

Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
3,584
Reaction Score
19,225
Which is the bigger upset for nyc?

Either of the Giants Super bowl wins over Brady...

Or:

If the Knicks took the series from the Celtics.

Both sides had their defenders.

(Don't make this about liking or disliking WFan. We've heard it all before)
 
Jaydumo20 said:
Which is the bigger upset for nyc?

Either of the Giants Super bowl wins over Brady...

Or:

If the Knicks took the series from the Celtics.

Both sides had their defenders.

(Don't make this about liking or disliking WFan. We've heard it all before)
Expand ...
Giants first SB over Brady.

That was the literal best team ever and the Giants were a Wild Card team.
 
.-.
The only argument for the Knicks winning would be that anything can happen in a single game. But I still don't think it's a close question.

That Patriot team was 18-0!!!!! The spread was like 13 points. This is a 2-3 matchup. Come on, let's not be silly here.
 
Not even debatable, a 3 vs a 2 seed , or a 10-6 vs 16-0 team.
 
Shoulda made this thread a poll, so everyone can see how obvious this answer is.
 
nomar said:
The only argument for the Knicks winning would be that anything can happen in a single game. But I still don't think it's a close question.

That Patriot team was 18-0!!!!! The spread was like 13 points. This is a 2-3 matchup. Come on, let's not be silly here.
Expand ...
I agree. I go with the giants too.
But the other side argued that vegas gave the giants a better chance than they are giving the Knicks. So if you bet $100 you'd win more betting on the Knicks. So even though the pats were coming in undefeated, odds makers gave the giants a better shot.
 
.-.
The Giants won the Super Bowl. Even if the Knicks beat the Celtics which might not happen. They still have to win two more series to win the NBA. Dumb comparison.
 
Of course the idiots here believe winning 1 game is a bigger upset than winning 4 of 7. It's honestly insane any of you are allowed to make decisions.
 
Jaydumo20 said:
I agree. I go with the giants too.
But the other side argued that vegas gave the giants a better chance than they are giving the Knicks. So if you bet $100 you'd win more betting on the Knicks. So even though the pats were coming in undefeated, odds makers gave the giants a better shot.
Expand ...

I can't seem to find the odds. Looks like Patriots were 12.5 to 13.5 favorites, which is a very large spread.

Celtics, at home, were favored by 9 last night. I know it's something like -800 for the series, so, yeah, the Knicks are longshots. But how many people were picking the Giants?

They're different sports, so I'm not sure using Vegas odds works here. We have a historically good team vs a wild card team on one hand, and a 2-3 matchup on the other. The Celtics are defending champs and very good, but they're not even the overall favorite is. That would be OKC, who also lost last night.
 
7774 said:
Of course the idiots here believe winning 1 game is a bigger upset than winning 4 of 7. It's honestly insane any of you are allowed to make decisions.
Expand ...

Thanks for the convincing argument, Mr. Dunning-Kruger.

How many of these were 7 game series?

The List: Top upsets in sports history

The greatest moments in sports are often when an underdogs win over the favorite. Check out our list of top ten upsets in sports history.
www.espn.com

You think everyone's an idiot for thinking Buster Douglas beating Mike Tyson was a big upset? Hey, he just had to do it once, right?!?! How about the Mircale on Ice? Easy peasy, says this genius.
 
Last edited:
What spurred the argument is that the Giants were +350 in the 18-1 Super Bowl and the Knicks were +590 to win the series. I do lean towards the Giants, but winning 1 game versus winning 4 of 7 makes it a reasonable argument
 
.-.
This would be a different argument if the Celtics were historically good, but I don’t think they’re magnitudes better than the Knicks on paper. We’re talking about a 3 seed upset over a 2 seed here.
 
7774 said:
Of course the idiots here believe winning 1 game is a bigger upset than winning 4 of 7. It's honestly insane any of you are allowed to make decisions.
Expand ...
Nobody thinks the 3 seed Knicks beating the 2 seed Celtics would qualify as a historical upset. It’s mildly surprising at best. Get over yourself.
 
Windham4th said:
I stopped listening/watching sports "news" when it started focusing of fantasy and betting.
Expand ...
I stopped when the people reporting the sports news thought they were more important than the sports players.
 
navery12 said:
What spurred the argument is that the Giants were +350 in the 18-1 Super Bowl and the Knicks were +590 to win the series. I do lean towards the Giants, but winning 1 game versus winning 4 of 7 makes it a reasonable argument
Expand ...
Yep. That was the root of it. I still think the giants have the edge based on it being the superbowl, undefeated season on the line, wild plays, Tom brady and their past successes. But if you go beyond the initial "duh, of course it's the giants" it's not as moronic an argument as some here claim. If you weren't a pats fan, they were the ultimate villain. The nba doesn't have a villain like that right now but should personal bias factor into the pure physical feat?. I know that I personally gave the giants a better chance of winning that first one than I do the Knicks winning this series (I'm a fan of neither team)
 
Last edited:
Jaydumo20 said:
I agree. I go with the giants too.
But the other side argued that vegas gave the giants a better chance than they are giving the Knicks. So if you bet $100 you'd win more betting on the Knicks. So even though the pats were coming in undefeated, odds makers gave the giants a better shot.
Expand ...
Importance is totally different than how big an upset.

The Giants had a much better chance beating the undefeated Pats in a one game Super Bowl than the Knicks do to beat the Celtics. But the Knicks winning the series wouldn't be nearly as important or memorable.
 
.-.
Bigger upset, Giants over undefeated Patriots. Harder to do, Knicks over Celtics.

Despite the Patriots being considered an all-time team I would give the edge to the Knicks being a more difficult upset over the Celtics because it's a 4 out of 7 series and the Celtics are huge favorites despite it being the 2 seed against the 3 seed (Celtics defending champs and 4-0 regular season over Knicks with only one game being close.) A series where you're huge underdogs is harder IMO and a run through the playoffs where you're huge underdogs is way harder IMO than a single game...

That's why what Dirk and the Mavs did in 2011 was so crazy. They beat a huge favorite OKC team with prime Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka then beat a huge favorite defending champion Lakers with Kobe, Pau, Odom, Artest, Bynum then beat the super banana boat Heat with Lebron, Wade, Bosh. Nobody gave them a chance in those matchups and everyone anointed the Heat and thought it would be a quick finals. The comebacks Dallas had and the gauntlet they went through was like nothing I've seen.
 
businesslawyer said:
Importance is totally different than how big an upset.

The Giants had a much better chance beating the undefeated Pats in a one game Super Bowl than the Knicks do to beat the Celtics. But the Knicks winning the series wouldn't be nearly as important or memorable.
Expand ...
Great point. That version of an upset hinges on "narrative" which makes the argument actually one worthy of discussion. @superjohn the Dallas example is a perfect argument for 'pure' upset. It doesn't have the historic cache but it was near impossible to imagine.
 
The Celtics aren’t even the best team in their conference, what are we even talking about.
 
Huskyforlife said:
The Celtics aren’t even the best team in their conference, what are we even talking about.
Expand ...
Boston is better than Cavs and would/will be favs if they play next round.

Its hard to compare a single game vs a 7 game series. I don't believe that Giants beat Pats in 7 game series (I'm a Giants fan).

Boston was -$1,000 going into series, that's a pretty lopsided series. I think this argument is much closer than most have given credit to. I'd still be shocked if Knicks win series or even another game.
 
Inyatkin said:
If the Knicks beat the Celtics, Cavs and Thunder/Nuggets on the way to their first title in 50 years, it could compare to beating the 18-0 Patriots. But not until then
Expand ...
If the Cavs survive
 
nomar said:
Thanks for the convincing argument, Mr. Dunning-Kruger.

How many of these were 7 game series?

The List: Top upsets in sports history

The greatest moments in sports are often when an underdogs win over the favorite. Check out our list of top ten upsets in sports history.
www.espn.com

You think everyone's an idiot for thinking Buster Douglas beating Mike Tyson was a big upset? Hey, he just had to do it once, right?!?! How about the Mircale on Ice? Easy peasy, says this genius.
Expand ...
If I could I would give this post 100 likes. Two of the best BY antagonists going at it…….@nomar squarely taking the lead.

This is classic entertainment. Post less read more and enjoy the ruthlessness. Visiting the BY as a message board is akin to going to a fight and having a hockey game break out. Classic entertainment IMHO…..
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,640
Messages
4,587,406
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom