Yeah, I think just basing it off of the results is a valid way to decide who's the better team, but I think it's valid to illustrate the way we might make certain concessions in places where it logically doesn't make sense.

For instance, I doubt if an underdog team beat a favorite in a single game, that many would call that proof that the underdog was the better team. A 7 game series might not actually be a dramatic increase in the likelihood that the favorite would win, and yet we're comfortable citing that as proof that the winner is definitively the better team and in many cases using that to adjust perceptions of previous outcomes.

Again, it's fine however anyone wants to determine who was the better team or not, I just wanted to open up discussion that best-of-7 is not necessarily a dramatic boost in confidence over a best-of-1 for anyone who might not be aware of the math there.