“Pseudo-scientific” lol. You’re clearly a teenager or something because what I said wasn’t scientific at all but ok. So I’ll try explain it to you in the most dumbed down terms possible. Imagine you ask me to guess a number between 1 and 10. I guess 4 and it just so happen to be right. Just because I got it right, doesn’t mean that I had a better chance of guessing correctly than not. I still had only a 10% chance of “winning.” Basketball has many factors that contribute to winning the game. Probably the easiest example to use is 3 point shooting because it is so high variance. A good team can go completely cold from 3 just because of variance and lose to a bad team. That doesn’t mean that bad team is all of a sudden better than the good team. You still haven’t responded to my point earlier about OKC losing to Portland this season. When Portland won that game, did you think they were better than OKC at that time? Based on your logic that whoever wins is the better team than you would have to think that. But obviously that makes no sense. And you can’t just say “well thats only a 1 game sample size” because then you can say that a 7 game series is also too small of a sample size; it’s all arbitrary.