Conference Semifinals · 2014-15
6 games · Cleveland Cavaliers advanced
Every game
Game 1May 4
CHI 99@
CLE 9227·22·32·18 / 15·29·26·2230%Game 2May 6CHI 91@CLE 10618·27·26·20 / 38·26·23·1966%Game 3May 8CLE 96@CHI 9924·25·24·23 / 18·29·27·2561%Game 4May 10CLE 86@CHI 8426·23·12·25 / 28·17·23·1639%Game 5May 12CHI 101@CLE 10624·20·27·30 / 25·29·26·2668%Game 6May 14CLE 94@CHI 7333·25·15·21 / 31·13·16·1342%
CHI 99@CLE 9227·22·32·18 / 15·29·26·2230%Game 2May 6CHI 91@CLE 10618·27·26·20 / 38·26·23·1966%Game 3May 8CLE 96@CHI 9924·25·24·23 / 18·29·27·2561%Game 4May 10CLE 86@CHI 8426·23·12·25 / 28·17·23·1639%Game 5May 12CHI 101@CLE 10624·20·27·30 / 25·29·26·2668%Game 6May 14CLE 94@CHI 7333·25·15·21 / 31·13·16·1342%Each game opens its own page with the period breakdown, the team totals and the full player box score.
What the model made of it
Games it favoured correctly
3 of 6
Mean probability on the winner
51.0%
Brier over the series
0.2610
A backtest, and a sample of 6. The model was refit on games strictly earlier than each of these, so it never saw the result — but a record over a handful of games is not evidence in either direction. The one that means something is on the accuracy page, over 25,749.