first_img Mourinho has something to say to Conte at the final whistle Jose Mourinho appeared to take his frustrations out on Antonio Conte after his Manchester United side lost 4-0 at former club Chelsea, but the Blues boss has insisted he did nothing wrong.The United manager spoke at length to Conte at the final whistle,  although neither boss revealed what was discussed between them when quizzed by the media.It was suggested the Portuguese was upset by the Italian when he encouraged the Stamford Bridge support to cheer on the Blues when they were already 4-0 up on Sunday.Reports in Italian media said Mourinho told Conte: “You don’t celebrate like that at 4-0, you can do it at 1-0, otherwise it’s humiliating for us.”Mourinho, who was sacked by Chelsea for a second time last December, insisted the conversation should be private, despite choosing to conduct it in front of 41,000 people, the Stamford Bridge press box and several television cameras.“I speak to Conte, I don’t speak to you [the media],” Mourinho said in his post-match press conference.“It was me and Antonio and stays with me and him. Unless he wants to share.”Conte also declined to comment, although was more open on the matter with Italian press.“I’ve been a player too and I know how to behave,” Conte told Sky Italia.“I always show great respect for everyone, including Manchester United.“There was no incident, it was just a normal thing to do. I wasn’t mocking anyone, I wouldn’t do that.”During his Chelsea days Mourinho once suggested the atmosphere at Stamford Bridge was like playing in an empty stadium, but on this occasion the fans responded to Conte’s request to increase the volume.“It was right to call our fans in a moment when I was listening to only the supporters of Manchester United, at 4-0,” Conte said in his post-match press conference.“The players, after a 4-0 win, deserved a great clap. It’s very normal.“If we want to cut the emotion we can go home and change our job.”Mourinho’s return to the Bridge began with an embrace from Chelsea captain John Terry, again a substitute, and a warm reception from the home fans.But as his side started leaking goals, with Pedro opening the scoring after just 30 seconds, the chants turned to mocking with a chorus of ‘You’re not special anymore’ sounding from the stands.Asked about the reception, Mourinho said: “I was in the game and I didn’t feel it. For sure it was not negative, but no reason to be.“What they have against me? What I have against them? Nothing.” 1last_img read more

first_img Tottenham have drawn three and lost one game at Arsenal in the Premier League since Pochettino took over at Spurs 1 Mauricio Pochettino felt aggrieved with decisions in the build-up to both Arsenal goals as Tottenham suffered a 2-0 derby defeat. Shkodran Mustafi and Alexis Sanchez secured the Gunners a dominant 2-0 victory at the Emirates Stadium, but there was a hint of fortune about each of the first-half goals.Mustafi’s header came after referee Mike Dean had awarded a dubious free-kick for a foul on Sanchez, while Alexandre Lacazette appeared offside in the build-up to their second.Spurs boss Pochettino told Sky Sports: “I need to say nothing, everyone who was here or at home watching the game, they saw what happened. We have to move on. It’s not easy to accept, because we lose the game.“We were better than them until the goal. The free-kick (should not have been given) and I think (it was) offside.The first, sure (it was offside), the second one maybe.“In this type of game when you play top sides like Arsenal, it’s little details. It changed the game and that disappointed me. But that’s football. We have to accept.”Pochettino insisted Harry Kane and Dele Alli were fit to play the game.The duo pulled out of England’s two friendlies last week and produced lacklustre performances before both were substituted with 15 minutes left at the Emirates Stadium.“Yes they were OK to play of course,” Pochettino added. “But after 2-0, 15 minutes to finish the game, I think to not take any risks. Then we tried to put (Fernando) Llorente and Son (Heung-min) on fresh and try to score, and we had a few chances to score.”last_img read more

first_imgRelated Posts 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market Tags:#Podcasts#web Chris Lydon’s new public radio show, Open Source, goes live. First show is on Web 2.0!Chris wrote afterwards: “‘The revenge of the sources’ was a great line from Dave Winerña powerful capsule of the driving energy in Web expressionism.” A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai…center_img Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting richard macmanuslast_img read more

first_imgServerless computing is a computing environment where developers can write software without needing to know the details of the server where the software will ultimately run. In general, developers don’t need to know server specs, storage, clustering or any configurations. Niko Köbler, a software architect, said that “with serverless, you just pay for what you actually use. There is no idle time of infrastructure you have to pay for. If there is just one event per hour, and your function will just run one second, you’ll pay only for one second per hour, not the whole hour as currently with VMs and other platforms, because you need the environment available just in case there will be an event. And if there suddenly are thousands of events per second, your cloud provider will take care of that; the whole environment will scale transparently without forcing you to do anything.” Ben Kehoe, Research Scientist at iRobot, wrote that the importance of serverless is that it “is a way to focus on business value. How do functions help you deliver value? They let you focus on writing business logic, not coding supporting infrastructure for your business logic.”center_img Amir Jerbi, CTO at Aqua Security , said that “serverless is a rather bad name for a cohort of technologies that enable executing application code without managing or caring about the underlying infrastructure, and doing so on demand and in a highly automated way.”last_img read more

first_imgLet me speak in defense of the click for a moment.There’s no term I find more puzzling in modern media jargon than “clickbait.” A story lives to be told. Writers write for their readers. What does a storyteller long for more than the gaze of a rapt listener?Back in the early days of the Web, the click was novel, a brain-busting rush of seemingly endless information. We clicked and clicked and clicked, surfing the Web until we reached the end of the Internet.The author with Flipboard’s Mike McCueTwo decades on, the click has become a trick—one some disillusioned scribes played on their readers, who may not have been aware they were involved in a game.Yes, you can manipulate readers into reading a story that disappoints them—an unoriginal tale ripped from elsewhere, an overblown promise, a heartstring-yanker that may or may not have any relationship to the facts.What that misses: Just because there are bad stories, and bad storytellers, doesn’t mean that good stories don’t still deserve to be heard.It’s why we write.And it’s a fundamental dream of the Web, that anyone can write and be heard.The emptiness of the charge of “clickbait” lies in this: Would you rather live in a world where no one clicked on links? Where no one read online? Where nobody’s stories were heard?The real problem isn’t the trickiness of clickiness. The real problem is that it’s still far too hard for the right stories to rise out of the noise. The Web has become festooned with links—too many to ever click. We can never reach the end of the Internet now. But the real tragedy is if we stop trying to find it.The Click Becomes The FlipOne of the pleasures of talking to Mike McCue, the CEO of Flipboard, is that he’s a veteran of that early Web. McCue and I sat down earlier in August at our an event in our ReadWriteMix series to talk about the changes he’s seen in the media landscape in the quarter-century since he founded Paper Software, an early technology company which he ended up selling to Netscape, the groundbreaking Web-browser company which paved the way for the Internet’s early growth.A through line in McCue’s career is making tools for publishers, from Paper’s 3D graphics to Netscape’s Netcaster software, which broadcast updates from websites in a way that eerily presaged Twitter, to Tellme, which aimed to build voice commands into the Web, and eventually Flipboard.Flipboard is known for its news-reading app, which first launched on the iPad in 2010. It actually replaced the click of the Web with a new gesture, the flip, a metaphor borrowed from print magazines. Readers flipped from article to article, from tweet to Facebook update to headline.For its first three years, Flipboard limited who could tell stories in its app. You could hear from your friends on Twitter and Facebook. Flipboard had a small in-house editorial crew collecting links to big news stories. And Flipboard partnered with large, established publishers to create flippable versions of their writers’ work.That all changed last year, when Flipboard opened up to all comers. Anyone could create a magazine by “flipping” links into a collection. And like a magazine, you could subscribe to these collections.The effect on Flipboard’s business was palpable. Some 7 million Flipboard users turned themselves into magazine makers, creating 10 million magazines as of early August. And the flood of new material drew new readers onto Flipboard: Its user count doubled from 50 million in March 2013 to more than 100 million today.Flipboard provided those editors with both the tools of creation and a ready audience. And they built on that platform, making it an even better venue for digital magazine makers.The Audience Is The NetworkThe moral of this story is the inseparability of tools for storytelling and tools for finding audiences. Flipboard’s interface for magazine editors is elegantly designed, but what really makes it appealing are those 100 million mobile users who might get a look at your collection of Jack Russell Terrier photos.That also explains why Tumblr and YouTube, two very different mediums for storytelling, are so appealing. They combine tools for creating with tools for connection and distribution. Tumblr lets you follow users, a subscription of sorts, and it lets users spread posts through its “reblog” button. YouTube, too, lets you follow creators’ channels, an arrangement that has led to a particularly intense and intimate fan culture. But it doesn’t hurt that it has more than a billion people’s eyeballs on the site.If the medium is the message, then the audience is the network.(Full disclosure: ReadWrite’s parent company, Say Media, has a stake in this debate. It makes a tool for publishing websites called Tempest, and it sells ads for its own properties like ReadWrite as well as for independent publishers on that platform.)Speaking of mediums: If you want an example of what happens when you build great storytelling tools but not a great audience, take the cautionary tale of the grandly named Medium, Twitter cofounder Ev Williams’ latest startup. People praise its story-writing interface, which is a great advance over the likes of WordPress or Blogger. But it hasn’t delivered much in the way of readers, despite promising to feature authors’ work in topical collections and, in some cases, pay them. One notable publication, LadyBits, quit Medium, citing frustration with its changing content-management features and pay scheme. Medium editor-in-chief Evan Hansen wrote:One thing we learned: Paying for clicks is not automatically a recipe for producing scads of short, thoughtless posts. We picked editors we trusted, and we found, for the most part, they respected the site and reliably delivered high quality writing. We also learned (surprise) that high quality posts do not automatically garner attention and audience commensurate with the effort of producing them. As a result, our payment model failed to support some really terrific contributors.All click, no bait.Flipboard has just tiptoed into the same territory as Medium. It’s beginning to pay some of its contributors a share of the advertising revenues their magazines generate. In its first three months of operation, Flipboard wrote $1 million in checks to publishers. It’s a small start. YouTube is probably the best example of a service that has balanced building tools for self-expression, generating large audiences, and delivering a payout to the top tier of creators. It helps that it has a virtual lock on online video.Can Flipboard—or another player—deliver that same trifecta of tools, audience, and money to the mobile world? If you’re interested in reading and writing, as I am, you have to root for the companies that are trying to figure this out.Photo by Kara Brodgesell for ReadWrite Related Posts Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting owen thomascenter_img 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market Tags:#digital magazines#digital media#digital publishing#Flipboard#Flipboard magazines#Medium#Mike McCue#mobile media#online media#Tumblr#YouTube A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai…last_img read more

first_imgRajasthan failed to make the playoffs and finished fifth in the IPL last seasonThe 2008 Indian Premier League champions, Rajasthan Royals, failed to make the playoffs and finished fifth last season. The Royals, under the guidance of coach Paddy Upton, will be looking to improve their last season’s performance in the latest edition of the IPL.During the IPL Auction this year, Rajasthan Royals spent a staggering Rs 1.40 crore on South African cricketer Christopher Morris. The team also added South African bowler Juan Theron alongside Pradeep Sahu and Sagar Trivedi to boost their squad. The Royals will be lead by Australia’s swashbuckling batsman Shane Watson who was pivotal in his country’s triumphant World Cup campaign. Watto will be supported by Ajinkya Rahane at the top-order who has been a consistent performer with the bat for Royals over the years now. In Steven Smith and Sanju Samson they have two seasoned Twenty20 batsmen who can absorb pressure and accelerate the innings.Their bowling department is comprised of James Faulkner, Tim Southee, Kane Richardson and Vikramjeet Malik. Seasoned cricketer Praveen Tambe and Steven Smith will cater to the spin-bowling for the Rajasthan Royals.With new recruits at their disposal, Royals will be eager to end their trophy drought this year.Players Retained(2015): Shane Watson, Abhishek Nayar, Ajinkya Rahane, Ankit Nagendra Sharma, Ben Cutting, Deepak Hooda, Dhawal Kulkarni, Dishant Yagnik, James Faulkner, Kane Richardson, Karun Nair, Pravin Tambe, Rahul Tewatia, Rajat Bhatia, Sanju Samson, Steven Smith, Stuart Binny, Tim Southee, Vikramjeet Malik.Players Bought(2015): Christopher Morris(Rs 1.40 cr), Juan Theron(Rs 30 lakh), Pradeep Sahu(Rs 10 lakh), Dinesh Salunkhe(Rs 10 lakh), B Singh Saran(Rs 10 lakh) and SV Trivedi(Rs 10 lakh).advertisementPlayers Released(2015): Amit Mishra, Ankush Bains, Brad Hodge.Squad: Shane Watson(c), Abhishek Nayar, Ajinkya Rahane, Ankit Nagendra Sharma, Ben Cutting, Deepak Hooda, Dhawal Kulkarni, Dishant Yagnik, James Faulkner, Kane Richardson, Karun Nair, Pravin Tambe, Rahul Tewatia, Rajat Bhatia, Sanju Samson(wk), Steven Smith, Stuart Binny, Tim Southee, Vikramjeet Malik, Chris Morris, Juan Theron, Barinder Singh Saran, Dinesh Salunkhe, Sagar Trivedi, Pardeep Sahulast_img read more

first_imgThe Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) will recognize Emmy Award-winning actor Wayne Brady with a SAMHSA Special Recognition Award at the 2015 Voice Awards.Mr. Brady is being recognized for sharing his personal journey of recovery from depression and helping to improve public attitudes about mental health and addiction issues.The 10th annual Voice Awards event — to be hosted by actress Chandra Wilson of ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy” — will bring together the entertainment industry and the behavioral health community to recognize community champions and television and film productions that increase public awareness and understanding of mental and substance use disorders and the reality of recovery. This year, the event will spotlight the impact that suicide has on individuals, families, and communities.The Voice Awards recognizes consumer/peer leaders who share their personal stories of resilience to educate the public about behavioral health and demonstrate that people with mental and substance use disorders can recover, lead meaningful lives, and contribute to their communities. Consumer/Peer Leadership Awards will be presented to Veronica Alston (Lusby, MD), Neil Campbell (Atlanta, GA), Bob Carolla, J.D. (Arlington, VA), Dese’Rae L. Stage (Brooklyn, NY), and Cheryl Sharp (Annapolis, MD). The Young Adult Leadership Award will be presented to Hayley Winterberg (Glendale, AZ). DeQuincy Lezine of Fresno, CA, will receive the Lifetime Achievement Award for his exemplary leadership in suicide prevention research and advocacy at the community, state, and national levels.The Voice Awards also honor writers and producers who incorporate dignified, respectful, and accurate portrayals of behavioral health issues into their film and television productions. This year’s finalists include A Long Way Down; Cake; Infinitely Polar Bear; To Write Love On Her Arms; Welcome to Me; “Elementary” (CBS); “Empire” (FOX); and “Madame Secretary” (CBS).WHEN: Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Arrivals and Pre-Show—6 p.m. PDT
Awards Program—7:30 p.m. PDTWHERE: Royce Hall at UCLA, 340 Royce Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90095Find out more here.last_img read more

first_imgAdvertisement “This partnership gives children the chance to enter the kitchen alongside one of the country’s top chefs, and show all of Canada their cooking skills,” said Laird White, Director, Brand Partnerships, Bell Media. “We are excited to see how these little chefs follow up last year’s group of creative cooks!”After the initial call for entries, 10 finalists will be selected by a judging panel and Canadians will be able to vote for their favourite Little Chef at Each semi-finalist wins a culinary prize pack valued at $225. Following the voting period, the judging panel will select the two finalists who will travel to Toronto with their families to appear in an episode of THE MARILYN DENIS SHOW to compete in a cook-off for a chance to win the grand prize trip. More details about Top 10 and voting will be provided in the coming weeks. Viewers can visit for full rules and regulations.The contest will be promoted and featured at major retailers across Canada and supported at store level with “Little Chef Program” support material and promotional programs.The Little Chef Program provides tools and tips to help parents cook with their kids. The Program includes Little Chef Approved recipes, age-appropriate tasks for kids 5-7, 8-10, and 11-13 years old, and information about the important skills they’ll learn as their kitchen skills evolve. The Little Chef Approved recipes are popular not only with kids, but with adults, too. Recipes include Smashed Potato Pizza and Bacon Wrapped Creamer Potatoes and more. Social Media links Login/Register With: To tweet this release:” alt=”last_img” /> read more

It’s championship week in men’s college basketball, the last chance for schools to make an impression on the selection committee before the NCAA tournament field is announced Sunday evening. If you’re a bubble team, you’re hoping a strong showing in your conference tournament can persuade the committee to put extra weight on those games, perhaps to the point of ignoring a previously spotty track record.Figuring out how much weight to give a late hot streak — as opposed to a team’s season-long résumé — can be tough for the committee. Fans filling out their brackets face the same decision. Conference tournaments might be the first chance you’ve had to see some schools play; a deep conference run could make the difference between marking a team down for an early exit or slotting it into the Final Four. But should it? Or is it simply recency bias to think a breakout conference tourney performance matters in the NCAA tournament?To take a few preliminary stabs at answering that question, I computed pre- and post-game Simple Rating System (SRS) scores for every conference tournament and NCAA tournament game since 1985 (when the NCAA field expanded to its familiar 64-team format), using them to establish each team’s expected win probability1The link leads to a football model, but the underlying Stern-Winston methodology can be applied to college basketball, for which Jeff Sagarin has found that the standard deviation of scoring margin around a prediction is 10 points. going into a given game.If teams that had surprising conference tournament runs (relative to their pre-tournament ratings) tended to carry that magic over into the NCAA tourney, we might expect there to be a relationship between how many “extra” wins a team had in each tournament. Take the 2010-11 Connecticut Huskies as an example: They won five Big East tournament games against an expectation of 2.5 (the ninth-most-surprising conference tournament performance of the past 30 years) and then proceeded to rattle off six NCAA tournament wins versus an expectation of 3.6 (the 12th-most-surprising NCAA run in the same span).For UConn, the conference tournament was a stepping stone to bigger things.But here’s the catch: Those Huskies were the exception, not the rule. Across the entire population of NCAA tournament-bound teams since 1985, there’s practically no relationship between how much a team outperforms its expectations in the conference tournament and the same metric in the NCAA tournament.2This is true whether we look at all conferences or restrict our sample to major conferences. An alternative way to look at whether conference tournament momentum leads to better NCAA outcomes is to see whether teams whose SRS ratings changed substantially during conference tournaments saw a commensurate change during the NCAA tournament. But again, there is essentially no relationship between a surprising performance in conference tournament play and in the NCAA tourney.The admitted flaw in both approaches is the same one I ran into when evaluating which college basketball coaches outperform NCAA tournament expectations based on seeding. Such a method ostensibly captures underperformance in the final game of a tournament, but it doesn’t detect the missing future wins expected of a favored team going forward. Moreover, these results shouldn’t be taken to say that conference tournaments have no predictive value. A team’s post-conference-tourney SRS is slightly more correlated with its eventual NCAA tournament wins than its rating before the conference tourney began.However, this analysis does serve as a warning against putting too much emphasis on the conference tournament relative to a team’s entire body of work, especially when it comes to picking unexpectedly hot conference tournament teams to go further than you’d otherwise predict for teams with their résumés.Check out FiveThirtyEight’s March Madness predictions. read more

Opponents’ block %-0.09 Opponents’ FTA/FGA-0.02 Cavaliers’ block %+0.00 Cavaliers’ 3-point %+0.58 Cavaliers’ steal %+0.36 Opponents’ free throw %-0.01 Cavaliers’ offensive rebound %+0.13 Cavaliers’ 2-point %+0.32 MetricCorrelation with the Cavaliers’ efficiency Opponents’ offensive rebound %-0.26 Opponents’ steal %-0.23 Opponents’ turnover %+0.36 By far the statistic that tracked most closely with the Cavaliers’ overall efficiency in any given game was their 3-point percentage, which had a correlation coefficient of 0.58. (By comparison, the correlation between the Warriors’ 3-point percentage and their efficiency margin was 0.44; for the Rockets, the correlation was 0.38; and for the Celtics, it was 0.28.)Now, it is fair to ask which direction the causation goes here. The Cavs’ offense is mainly predicated on LeBron James coming off a ball screen and either creating for himself or finding the open man when the opponent brings help. And certainly James himself has taken on a huge percentage of Cleveland’s 3-point shooting load. So maybe the Cavs are simply getting better looks because the rest of their offense — i.e., LeBron — is functioning at a higher level. (For example, the Cavs have shot a very healthy 20-for-32 on passes from James in the Eastern Conference Finals so far.)But if LeBron is generating more open shots only in games where the Cavs are rolling, it’s not showing up in the numbers. According to Second Spectrum’s Quantified Shot Quality metric (which calculates an expected shooting percentage for each shot based on its difficulty), Cleveland doesn’t tend to get better deep looks in its good games than its bad ones. In wins during the playoffs, the Cavs have an expected effective field goal percentage of 52.4 percent on 3-pointers; in losses, that number barely drops, to 52.0 percent. Instead, it’s Cleveland’s ability to capitalize on those 3-pointers that has varied wildly: from an eFG% 4.4 points higher than expected in postseason wins to one 10.6 points lower than expected in losses.Game 2 against Boston was a great case study of Cleveland’s Jekyll-and-Hyde shooting tendencies. In the first half, the Cavs built a 7-point lead while going 7-for-14 (50 percent) from deep; in the second half, they watched that lead slip away as they shot a dismal 3-for-17 (18 percent) from beyond the arc. Their shot quality on threes (again according to Second Spectrum) declined by 2.1 points of expected eFG% between halves, so the Celtics did a better job of challenging the Cavs’ shooters as the game went on.3According to ESPN’S Stats and Information Group, the Celtics contested 92 percent of Cleveland’s shots in the second half of Game 2. But a far bigger factor in Cleveland’s decline was its massive 35-point drop in eFG% versus expected — in other words, the kind of streaky variance that can’t be explained by shot quality alone.And what does explain it? Maybe the Cavs shoot so many threes — they’re third in the playoffs in attempts per game — that they’re bound to run up stretches of good- and bad-shooting games like this. Or maybe they’re just collectively trying to provide further evidence that the hot hand really does exist. Whatever the explanation, Cleveland has to hope that its shooting starts fluctuating in the opposite direction, and fast. Because not even James, with his 42 points, 12 assists and 10 rebounds in Game 2, could keep the Cavs from digging themselves a deeper hole in this series.We’ve seen the Cavaliers brush off these kinds of cold shooting performances in the past, burying opponents under an onslaught of threes that can make you wonder how they ever got cold in the first place. But that’s also the point: Cleveland needs a sustained 3-point resurgence if it’s going to claw its way back against the Celtics. As crucial as LeBron’s production is to the Cavs, it might be just as important for his teammates to step up and knock down their shots when they get the chance.Check out our latest NBA predictions. Opponents’ 3-point %-0.30 Cavaliers’ FTA/FGA+0.05 Opponents’ 2-point %-0.22 Opponents’ 3PA/FGA+0.01 Opponents’ assist %-0.12 Cavaliers’ assist %+0.13 Three-point accuracy determines Cleveland’s fateCorrelation between the Cavaliers’ efficiency differentials and various metrics for games in the 2017-18 season, through May 16 Pace-0.04 Cavaliers’ turnover %-0.19 Source: Cavaliers’ 3PA/FGA+0.00 The Cleveland Cavaliers have plenty of problems right now, and many of them concern their struggles on defense. Through two games in these Eastern Conference finals — both losses — they’re allowing 112.8 points per 100 possessions against a Boston Celtics team that averaged only 105.2 during the regular season (according to Advanced NBA Stats).1And All-Star guard Kyrie Irving contributed to that regular-season mark for most of the year, but he was lost to injury late in the regular season and has missed the entire playoffs. They’ve been torched by Jaylen Brown (who’s scored 23 each game) and they have no answer for the threat Al Horford poses from both the inside and outside.But the Cavs being inept on defense is not really breaking news. They’ve ranked among the league’s worst at that end of the floor all season. Instead, they win games with their offense, and not just because LeBron James can decide to take over games whenever he wants (although that helps). More than perhaps any other team in the NBA, the Cavs’ fortunes rise and fall based on how well they knock down shots from the perimeter. And they’d better heat up soon against the Celtics, or their bid for a fourth consecutive East title will clang harmlessly off the rim like so many of their 3-point shots.The playoffs have helped crystallize the Cavaliers’ reputation as a team that lives and dies by its shooting. This is, after all, the same group who struggled to get past the Indiana Pacers while making only 32 percent of their 3-pointers, then turned around and hit 41 percent from deep while steamrolling the Raptors a week later. Even during the regular season, though, Cleveland was unusually dependent on the hotness of its shooting hand: In wins, the Cavs made threes at a 41 percent clip, versus just 31 percent in losses — a 10-percentage-point gap that was the biggest in the league. And that regular-season gap has only widened, to nearly 11 percentage points, during the playoffs.Every team shoots better in wins than losses; making shots is kind of the point of the game, after all. But some teams can get by during poor shooting nights more readily than others. The Minnesota Timberwolves, for instance, were as good on offense as the Cavs this season, but they had the league’s third-smallest difference between their 3-point percentage in wins and losses (3 percentage points) because they didn’t really rely on threes for a strong offensive performance.2Indeed, the T-Wolves tried the fewest threes per 100 possessions of any team in the NBA this year. For the Cavs, though, threes are the leading indicator of their overall health as a team. Here are the correlations between various metrics and Cleveland’s efficiency margin in each game this season: Cavaliers’ free throw %+0.32 read more