As I wander through the Bleacher Reports today I notice a trend here, people jumping the gun. And I admit to doing this myself, making statements that are yet to be proven, and analysis of a series that has just begun. Specifically the Orlando Magic vs. the Boston Celtics, and the Houston Rockets vs. the LA Lakers.
As I look through the archives I get inundated with the same titles, titles like, "Lakers in trouble," "Lakers have nothing to worry about," "Rockets in prime position to advance," "Celtics look awful," "Magic showing Boston the Magic," but how do these writers come to this conclusion so early?
I am not undermining the importance of winning game one however what often tends to happen is writers, even ESPN, "experts," write as if the entire series is based off this one game.
The series is not over and no one should be talking about how one-sided or how the series is a huge upset based on game one, its just not accurate journalism. There's a word called sample size, and the sample size to critique a series just isn't big enough.
I do not believe that anyone should be summarizing the series until there are some must win games, where one team has three wins on another, because than the series could be over soon.
Something that some have done though is recapping a game, which is perfectly fine, I enjoy reading recaps of a game where it accurately displays a summary of the game while not saying that it is invariably over for one team.
I am not singling out anyone in this particular article, just stating exactly what is becoming a very bad trend on this website is people making faulty assumptions based on low sample sizes.
None of these series are over and no team should be in trouble or set after one game, its a long series and only time will tell who will come out on top in each series.