The [Detroit] Pistons did not lose because of the lack of ability. They are an all-around better team. They lost because of the law of averages. They will beat the [San Antonio] Spurs every two times out of three. When you examine the NBA finals [of 2005], that is exactly how they lost the seventh (last game) because that would have been three out of three. The Spurs will beat the Pistons one out of three. It just so happens that, that one time was the final game, because the Pistons had already won two in a row.

Question

Stephanie Hobbs

Mathematics

2 September, 14:28

The [Detroit] Pistons did not lose because of the lack of ability. They are an all-around better team. They lost because of the law of averages. They will beat the [San Antonio] Spurs every two times out of three. When you examine the NBA finals [of 2005], that is exactly how they lost the seventh (last game) because that would have been three out of three. The Spurs will beat the Pistons one out of three. It just so happens that, that one time was the final game, because the Pistons had already won two in a row.

+2

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Mathias Hahn · Answer 1

The Pistons lost due to the law of averages

Step-by-step explanation:

Premise 1: The Detroit Pistons are a better all-around team than the San Antonio Spurs

Conclusion 1: The Pistons did not lose [ the 2005 NBA finals ] due to lack of ability.

Premise 2: The Pistons will beat the Spurs two out of three times, and the Spurs will beat one out of three times

Premise 3: The Pistons won the series ' 5th and 6th games - two in a row, and if they had won the final game they would have won three out of three.

Conclusion 2: The Pistons lost due to the law of averages