1/3 Season Mark -- the Sched Ahead, Us vs. Them

by jscot on Dec 22, 2008 11:20 AM PST

OK, time for our schedule update, for those who are as nuts about this kind of thing as I am, but aren't actually nuts enough to create your own spreadsheet. Disclaimer right off the top: I haven't worked that hard at this, I just paste stuff in from NBA.com and let Microsoft do the work. I'm sure Paul Allen approves.

In this post, upper left corner introduced us to our four categories of games (I discussed them further here relative to the differences between our schedule and other Western contenders, and this is an update on that):

Home games against sub .500 teams.
Home games against winning teams (I'm including teams right at .500 in this category).
Road games at losing teams.
Road games at winning teams.

Obviously, Cat 1 are the easiest games, Cat 4 are the hardest, and Cat 2 & 3 have varying levels of difficulty. Also obviously, this is somewhat arbitrary. It draws a distinction between Chicago (currently 1/2 game below .500) and New Jersey (right at .500) which is spurious -- but it is generally a good way to compare the level of difficulty of games, and you have to draw the line somewhere to distinguish between hard games and easy games.

Because we play in the West, we have more games against winning teams than if we played in the East, so we can't assume 20 of each kind of game. This gives us the option of either forgetting this kind of schedule analysis, manually counting the games, or letting Microsoft work for us.

I'll break this down in several ways, just so all is clear. When I'm done, if there is a way someone would like me to break it down that I haven't done so, please let me know and I will direct rude thoughts in your general direction, or else do what you want, depending on how good my mood happens to be.

Total Games

At the last update, we had played significantly more games than our rivals, in general. This has changed, with all the time off this week. We have played 27 games, and all of our rivals have played 26 or 27 except New Orleans (23) and Utah (29). Slight advantage to Utah, and disadvantage to N.O., as far as the amount of rest in the schedule ahead.

Road Games

We are still leading the way in road games played, with 16. Utah and Houston have played 15, then Denver (14), Dallas and Phoenix (13), San Antonio (12), then L.A. and N.O. with 11. Without taking quality of road opposition into account, this is an advantage over our opponents, in that we have more of our road games out of the way, especially over S.A., L.A., and N.O, who have 4-5 more road games left than we do.

Games by Difficulty

CAT 4 -- Road Games, Winning Teams

PDX -- 10 played (3-7), 12 left (5 on second night of a back to back)
DAL -- 5 played (2-3), 18 left (5)
DEN -- 8 played (3-5), 14 left (7)
HOU -- 8 played (4-4), 14 left (5)
LA -- 6 played (4-2), 15 left (8)
NO -- 5 played (2-3), 17 left (6)
PHO -- 7 played (2-5), 14 left (3)
SA -- 6 played (2-4), 15 left (2)
UT -- 6 played (2-4), 16 left (10)

Every team has at least two more of these difficult games left than we do. Dallas has 6 more, Utah and N.O. 5 more. We have five of them left on back to backs, Utah has 10! Only Phoenix has a worse percentage than we do on these games, though Utah and S.A. are close, and Denver will be behind us if we pull off a sweep. Despite our worse percentage on these games, and having played more of them than anyone, we are still in great position. Having fewer of them remaining bodes well for the future.

CAT 3 -- Road Games, Losing Teams

PDX -- 6 played (5-1), 13 left (3 on second night of a back to back)
DAL -- 8 played (6-2), 10 left (2)
DEN -- 6 played (5-1), 13 left (2)
HOU -- 7 played (5-2), 12 left (4)
LA -- 5 played (3-2), 15 left (4)
NO -- 6 played (5-1), 13 left (4)
PHO -- 6 played (5-1), 14 left (7)
SA -- 6 played (5-1), 14 left (4)
UT -- 9 played (5-4), 10 left (2)

We are tied for the best record on the road against losing teams. Interestingly, the two worst at this are Utah and the L@kers. In general, except for Utah, teams are taking care of business on the road against losing teams. Their inability to do well in this category may just be due to injuries, but it is the main reason they are in danger of dropping behind in the NW. L.A. hasn't yet showed us whether they are road warriors, or whether they just beat up on teams at home.

CAT 2 -- Home Games, Winning Teams

PDX -- 6 played (5-1), 16 left (1 on second night of a back to back)
DAL -- 8 played (2-6), 13 left (2)
DEN -- 6 played (2-4), 16 left (3)
HOU -- 6 played (4-2), 16 left (2)
LA -- 7 played (6-1), 15 left (0)
NO -- 7 played (5-2), 15 left (3)
PHO -- 11 played (6-5), 11 left (0)
SA -- 8 played (3-5), 14 left (2)
UT -- 7 played (4-3), 14 left (0)

These are not easy games, as evidenced by the fact that 3 of our rivals have losing records in these games, and Utah and Phoenix are just 1 game over .500. We have the second best record in this category, 1/2 game behind L.A. Blazer fans who complain that we don't really have that many wins against good teams need to look at this list. Note that we have as many of these games as anyone left. If we can continue to win them at anywhere near our current pace, we will be 4-5 seed, at worst, I suspect.

CAT 1 -- Home Games, Losing Teams

PDX -- 5 played (4-1), 14 left (0 on second night of a back to back)
DAL -- 5 played (5-0), 15 left (3)
DEN -- 7 played (7-0), 12 left (2)
HOU -- 6 played (5-1), 13 left (1)
LA -- 8 played (8-0), 11 left (1)
NO -- 5 played (4-1), 14 left (0)
PHO -- 3 played (3-0), 16 left (2)
SA -- 6 played (6-0), 13 left (4)
UT -- 7 played (6-1), 13 left (2)

Here is where Phoenix sees a little bit of hope, they have more of these easy games left than anyone. Note that, while our Clippers loss was painful, we aren't alone, 3 other teams also have home losses to losing teams.

All Games Against Winning Teams

PDX -- 16 played (8-8), 28 left
DAL -- 13 played (4-9), 31 left
DEN -- 14 played (5-9), 30 left
HOU -- 14 played (8-6), 30 left
LA -- 13 played (10-3), 30 left
NO -- 12 played (7-5), 32 left
PHO -- 18 played (8-10), 25 left
SA -- 14 played (5-9), 29 left
UT -- 13 played (6-7), 30 left

The idea that we aren't that good against good teams is not supported by facts. Only three teams in the West have a better record against teams with a winning record (and some of the records above are bolstered by games against NJ, which is a .500 team). Only L.A. has a significantly better record against winning teams than we do. We also have fewer games left against winning teams than all of our rivals except Phoenix. Though most of their games against winning teams have been at home (11 out of the 18), Phoenix has a large share of their tough games out of the way, which could help them as they go along.

All Games Against Losing Teams

PDX -- 11 played (9-2), 27 left
DAL -- 13 played (11-2), 25 left
DEN -- 13 played (12-1), 25 left
HOU -- 13 played (10-3), 25 left
LA -- 13 played (11-2), 26 left
NO -- 11 played (9-2), 27 left
PHO -- 9 played (8-1), 30 left
SA -- 12 played (11-1), 27 left
UT -- 16 played (11-5), 23 left

In general, everyone is taking care of business well against losing teams, even on the road, except Utah. Glaringly, Utah only has 23 games left against losing teams. Phoenix has 30 left, and everyone else is bunched in the 25-27 games range.

Back-to-Backs

As we know from the Clippers game, these can be difficult. You have to deal with both fatigue and less preparation time. The coaches don't have time to put in any new plays or defensive schemes. I'll give the number of back to backs left in the season, followed by (in parenthesis), the number in which the second game is in Cat 4, then Cat 3, etc.

PDX -- 9 (Cat 4 - 5, Cat 3 - 3,Cat 2 - 1,Cat 1 - 0)
DAL -- 12 (5,2,2,3)
DEN -- 14 (7,2,3,2)
HOU -- 12 (5,4,2,1)
LA -- 13 (8,4,0,1)
NO -- 13 (6,4,3,0)
PHO -- 12 (3,7,0,2)
SA -- 12 (2,4,2,4)
UT -- 14 (10,2,0,2)

We have the fewest back to backs left of any team. We knock off another tomorrow, and it will be a home game of a home and home -- if you have to do a back to back, make it that kind, where you get the second one at home. Utah and Denver tie for the most remaining. Utah has more back to backs that finish against winning teams on the road than we have total back to backs remaining.

By Team

Ok, team by team breakdown, starting with Portland, then in alphabetical order:

Portland (17-10)

Cat 4 -- 10 (3-7), 12 left (5 back to back)
Cat 3 -- 6 (5-1), 13 left (3)
Cat 2 -- 6 (5-1), 16 left (1)
Cat 1 -- 5 (4-1), 14 left (0)

We have notably more home games than road games left, and because of the toughness of our early season schedule, we have knocked out more than a third of our games against winning teams.

Dallas (15-11)

Cat 4 -- 5 (2-3), 18 left (5)
Cat 3 -- 8 (6-2), 10 left (2)
Cat 2 -- 8 (2-6), 13 left (2)
Cat 1 -- 5 (5-0), 15 left (3)

Dallas is not only lagging behind slightly in the standings, they have 6 more road games remaining against winning teams than we do. Dallas needs to find a way to win more against strong teams, especially at home, or they are unlikely to be a major threat to us. One thing to their advantage -- of their 12 remaining back-to-backs, on five of them the second game is at home, and two of the road games finish at losing teams. But Dallas appears (right now) a prime contender for the #9 spot.

Denver (17-10)

Cat 4 -- 8 (3-5), 14 left (7)
Cat 3 -- 6 (5-1), 13 left (2)
Cat 2 -- 6 (2-4), 16 left (3)
Cat 1 -- 7 (7-0), 12 left (2)

We are even with Denver. They have two more Cat 4 games left than we do, and two more which are back to backs. They have 12 Cat 1 games left (2 less than us) and two of those are back to backs, which as we know can be lost. Even if it is a home game, flying into Denver for a back to back probably isn't very easy. They have a total of 10 back to backs against winning teams, seven on the road and three at home (we have five on the road and one at home, against them).

If we can sweep Denver in these two games, even though it is early in the season, because of the schedule disparity it will not be easy for them to surpass us, especially because that would also give us the inside track for the tie-breaker against them. If we split, then we have a slight edge. If they sweep, they have an edge despite our easier schedule.

Houston (18-9)

Cat 4 -- 8 (4-4), 14 left (5)
Cat 3 -- 7 (5-2), 12 left (4)
Cat 2 -- 6 (4-2), 16 left (2)
Cat 1 -- 6 (5-1), 13 left (1)

While our remaining schedule is marginally easier than Houston's, they've shown an ability to beat good teams at home and compete on the road. If both teams continue to play to the same level as they have so far, we will remain very close until the end of the season, possibly with the seeding edge coming down to tie-breakers. Both teams have had injury troubles as well. Both teams are deep, and neither is particularly strong at the point.

L@kers (21-5)

Cat 4 -- 6 (4-2), 15 left (8)
Cat 3 -- 5 (3-2), 15 left (4)
Cat 2 -- 7 (6-1), 15 left (0)
Cat 1 -- 8 (8-0), 11 left (1)

L.A. has just made our Florida sweep look good by getting swept there. They've made a killing off of easy games, and their road record (7-4) is good but not dominant, so as they play more road games, they appear to be starting to come back down to earth. However, though their remaining schedule ranks up there among the toughest due to a preponderance of road games, they are too good, too deep, and too far ahead for us to even think about them, barring a drop-off in their play due to injury or Kobe blowups. The Hornets are the only team that I could foresee challenging them for the #1 seed, at this point.

New Orleans (16-7)

Cat 4 -- 5 (2-3), 17 left (6)
Cat 3 -- 6 (5-1), 13 left (4)
Cat 2 -- 7 (5-2), 13 left (3)
Cat 1 -- 5 (4-1), 14 left (0)

The Hornets have a tougher schedule ahead, with 5 more Cat 4 games left, and more back to backs as well. Small sample size, but they appear able to be competitive in Cat 4 games. I do not think the schedule difficulty makes up for the lead they have on us. If we want to catch them, we will have to play better -- the schedule isn't going to help us THAT much.

Phoenix (16-11)

Cat 4 -- 7 (2-5), 14 left (3)
Cat 3 -- 6 (5-1), 14 left (7)
Cat 2 -- 11 (6-5), 11 left (0)
Cat 1 -- 3 (3-0), 16 left (2)

The Suns are hard to read. They've been poor on the road against good teams, and not great at home (note that their two wins there against us were the second night of back to backs for us). Yet, despite that, they are still in a playoff seed right now, and they have got half of their home games against good teams out of the way already, and precisely 1/3 of their road games against good teams (at the 1/3 mark). So their schedule looks light as ar as the quality of opposition. And of their 14 Cat 4s, only 3 are back to backs. On the other hand, half of their 14 Cat 3s are back to backs.

As I see it, those Cat 3 back to backs provide a lot of banana peels, and I think the Suns will slip on some of them. Nevertheless, I think the Suns will continue to win more road games against weak teams than they lose, win almost all home games against those teams, and win enough against good teams to easily make the playoffs. Those who see them in the 8th seed battle are overlooking how few remaining games they have against winning teams, and how well they are taking care of the losing teams. We would expect Nash, Shaq, and Amare to beat up bad teams, and it is happening. The Suns will probably compete for the 4-7 seeds. I like our chances to stay ahead of them because of the number of road games we have already played.

San Antonio (16-10)

Cat 4 -- 6 (2-4), 15 left (2)
Cat 3 -- 6 (5-1), 14 left (4)
Cat 2 -- 8 (3-5), 14 left (2)
Cat 1 -- 6 (6-0), 13 left (4)

The Spurs have not been impressive against good teams, home or away. They have 3 more Cat 4s than we do, but 3 less on back to backs. They have plenty of back to backs, but 8 of the 12 are against losing teams. Our schedule is marginally easier than theirs, and we are half a game ahead. On the other hand, while both teams have had injuries, theirs may have been more costly so far. The Spurs will live forever. Another key injury could drag them into the 8-9 mess, but otherwise, they'll be somewhere in the 3-7 range. There is nothing in their remaining schedule to indicate it will be easy for them to make a huge move towards the top, nor that it will be extremely difficult to maintain position.

I think, due to the home/away disparity between their schedule and ours, that we've got a decent chance to stay ahead of the Spurs. It depends first on health (theirs and ours) and secondarily on how much they want a high seed. I believe they still have the talent to finish ahead of us this one more year in the seedings, if they want it bad enough to pull out all the stops and go for it. Due to age and injury vulnerability, I won't be surprised if they just settle for a middle seed. They know they can win road games in the playoffs, they don't need a high seed.

Utah (17-12)

Cat 4 -- 6 (2-4), 16 left (10)
Cat 3 -- 9 (5-4), 10 left (2)
Cat 2 -- 7 (4-3), 14 left (0)
Cat 1 -- 7 (6-1), 13 left (2)

If anyone looks like they are headed for a battle with Dallas for the 8-9 spot, it is Utah. They are very, very good when healthy and playing well, but their schedule is extremely tough. Not only do they have four more Cat 4s left than we do, 10 of the 16 are on back to backs -- and they haven't been impressive on Cat 4s. In fact, the only two they've won were this week, in NJ (that's that .500 team) and Detroit. They also lost to Boston and Chicago this week. That's actually a pretty good week for them.

They have already lost as many home games this year as they did all of last year, and Boston, L.A., and Cleveland haven't come to town. In fact, their home losses were Orlando (no shame there), NJ, Miami, and Chicago. They have not even begun to be the dominant home team they were last year. The only bright spot for them is that they still have most of their home games left against Western contenders (except us), and if they can become dominant at home again, they will be hurting their rivals at the same time they improve their position.

I no longer think the Jazz are favorites to win the division. With their creampuff early schedule, they needed to open a little bit of a gap to compensate for the hard games to come. They had better return to good health and top form very quickly, or all those back to backs against good teams on the road will take their toll.

Both of our games against the Jazz in Portland are the second of a back to back for them. If we win those, we take away their tie-breaker advantage, as well as putting a hurt on them in the W-L column. I expect us to win those games, and to finish ahead of the Jazz.

Stupid Final Record Projections

Past performance is no guarantee of future results. In each of the game categories (1-4), the sample size is still really small, so not even reflective of how well a team is playing, let alone predictive of how well a team will play. In addition, past results may have been in games where key players (on one team or another) were injured, and that may not be repeated in future games.

Nevertheless, for those who like to play the game just for the fun of it, here are projected wins for the season. This assumes that, for each category (1-4), a team will continue to win their remaining games in that category at the same pace they have won earlier games in that category. Since Phoenix is 3-0 in Cat 1, that means it projects they will win all 16 of their remaining Cat 1 games. It could happen, but I wouldn't bet the house on it, so please don't gamble based on my spreadsheet projections. I also use fractional wins, just for the fun of it, so our 3-7 record in Cat 4 means we will win 30% of our remaining 12 Cat 4s, for 3.6 wins. I project wins for each category, and sum them up.

Using these stupid projections, the final standings will be as follows:

L.A. -- 63.9 wins (we can hope they lose at Memphis and New Orleans, though, right?)
Portland -- 56.0 wins (don't call me a homer, the spreadsheet is blind to geography)
New Orleans -- 55.5 wins (proving that Brandon is worth 0.5 more wins than Chris Paul)
Houston -- 55.1 wins (if Artest weren't insane, they might get 56)
Phoenix -- 53.7 wins (I would enjoy that first round matchup with Houston, and I think Phoenix wins it -- T-Mac will never win a series)
San Antonio -- 50.9 (if you believe the spreadsheet is right on this one.... but wouldn't that be fun to see either the Spurs or Hornets go out in the first round)
Denver -- 50.4 (that's right, we're leading the NW by 5.6 wins right now, according to the spreadsheet -- I told you this was stupid, but it is mathematically accurate)
Dallas -- 48.0 (yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus, and he will give a playoff spot to a team with less than 50 wins this season -- if the spreadsheet projections are right, and they aren't)
Utah -- 47.0 (this was projecting down around 42 before their wins at NJ and Detroit, and if NJ loses one more game and becomes a losing team, Utah drops to 45.3, just by virtue of their home loss and road win shifting categories downward -- which demonstrates how pointless these kinds of projections can be)

In case I didn't mention it, don't trust these projections. The math is accurate, but this is not how accurate math was intended to be used. It is just for fun.

I TOLD YOU SO

Concluding Thoughts

As at the last update, the schedule bodes well for us maintaining our position. We have schedule advantages over the teams behind us (and some of those ahead of us). Obviously, you have to do it on the court, but the schedule is in our favor, and so is the fact that Greg is getting healthier and stronger, and our rookies are getting more and more assimilated into the team. If Martell also comes back and improves us, then that also is cause for optimism.

All in all, there is more cause for optimism than pessimism about our chances, not only to make the playoffs, but to get a seed somewhere in the 3-6 range. That is not a prediction of playoff success, but of regular season positioning.

Tweet Comment 62 comments | 18 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Rec'd

for putting considerable effort into an interesting analysis.

Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio

↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A

by HurraKane212 on Dec 22, 2008 11:37 AM PST reply actions

Agreed

also rec’d. Thanks for the sched analysis. I feel a bit doubtful about the potential for 56 wins. 50 sounds a little more like it to me. All said though, once a trend is set there very often is little variation. I wouldn’t be surprised if at the end of the season you find your analysis was pretty accurate.

by mr. driscoll on Dec 22, 2008 11:55 AM PST up reply actions

I said the projections are stupid

But I think we are headed for higher than 50. I predicted 55 before the season, and we’re actually ahead of where I thought we’d be now. But it isn’t the spreadsheet that drives that, because to project the next 14 Cat 1 games based on a sample size of 5 is pretty silly.

I think we’ll get (or exceed) 55 because we are going to gel together better, and Greg is going to get better, as the season goes along, and we have a lot of easy games ahead. Barring any key injuries, we are going to see more blowouts from this team. When everything clicks, they are devastating.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 22, 2008 2:10 PM PST up reply actions

projecting

…and we’re actually ahead of where I thought we’d be now.

I think they’re ahead of where every last one of us thought they’d be at this point. Didn’t we all take one look at the sched when it was released and say we would only be a little over .500 at christmas?

Fear the Pryzpocalypse

by postup on Dec 23, 2008 10:08 AM PST up reply actions

Some people

posted pretty optimistic predictions for this part of the season, but in general, I think you are right. My optimism for total wins was based on an assumption we’d have to really crank it up in the second half of the season.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 2:09 PM PST up reply actions

Still 55-27 !

I wrote up my calender and projected,
but the Orlando & Clip losses mean we have
to pick it up !

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Dec 23, 2008 5:01 PM PST up reply actions

good job

thats a ton of work. hopefully professor dave will give you an A for your final exam.

Honor Terry Porter

by Philthyanimal on Dec 22, 2008 1:01 PM PST reply actions

recced

a lot of work put into this, and an interesting read for stats!

although we should take it with a grain of salt, im positive some of your points will be quite important in the second half of the season, great work

by Yawnie on Dec 22, 2008 1:39 PM PST reply actions

C'mon people, pay attention

I haven’t worked that hard at this, I just paste stuff in from NBA.com and let Microsoft do the work.

I like any mathematical prediction that puts us at number 2. I’m trying to think of some non-obvious (injuries) counter-point to the cold, hard stats, but the only thing I can really think of is that some teams are playing over their heads and some are underperforming. Utah in particular has been dealing with injuries to Boozer and Williams. They could surge in the 2nd half of the season not unlike last year.

I still pick Phoenix as the team most likely to fall apart. Someone is going to get injured and if it’s Nash, it’s all over for them.

"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"

by Magnum on Dec 22, 2008 2:19 PM PST reply actions

Yeah

the only work is actually reading the numbers out of the spreadsheet and writing it up. Well, actually, the spreadsheet took some work, too, but that was a one-off, and I actually work with spreadsheets sometimes in real life, so it’s no big deal, it didn’t take that long.

The spreadsheet knows nothing about injuries. The most likely injury impacts are Phoenix or S.A. (because of age of key players), or Houston (because they are Houston). The most likely positive injury impacts (getting players who have been out back into the team, in condition, and melded into the rotation) are Utah (Williams and Boozer), S.A. (Manu and Parker), and Portland (Oden and Martell).

The spreadsheet knows only about schedule difficulty, and it is imprecise because it doesn’t distinguish between Miami and Boston (both are winning teams), or between NJ and OKC (both are losing teams).

The spreadsheet also knows nothing about teams gelling together as the season goes along. Teams unlikely to benefit from this are S.A. (they’ve been playing together forever), Utah, Dallas, and N.O. Teams likely to benefit from this factor are Phoenix, Portland, Denver, and L.A.

Other factors are young players improving over the course of the season and old players declining. There is a chance the first will help us, and it isn’t likely to help many of our rivals (perhaps Utah or N.O.). The second (old players declining) may not happen much in season, but it could, and if so, it might impact Dallas, Phoenix, or San Antonio negatively.

Just about all the factors are favorable to us, or neutral.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 1:13 AM PST up reply actions

Great post jscot.

Not much to argue about here, but one nagging thought in the back of my head:

If we couldn’t beat the Clippers at home, I’m worried that we’re going to play down to the league’s lesser teams. We’d already played down to Minn as well, but pulled it out.

It’ll be a big step for the team when they consistently beat the bottom-rung teams by 10 or more and we’re not really sweating those games as much anymore.

by Timmay! on Dec 22, 2008 2:38 PM PST reply actions

If New Orleans couldn't beat the Kings at home

I’m worried that they are going to play down to the league’s lesser teams. Last Saturday, OKC lost by 4 in Dallas. Houston has lost at home to Indiana, and struggled with the Clips. Phoenix only beat Memphis by 5 in a home game. The Spurs beat OKC by 5.

It happens. It’s the NBA. Everybody has to sweat those games against the lower teams. The Clippers had an all-star (Baron) and an all-star scorer (Zach — if only he did something besides score, he’d be an allstar, too) on fire that night.

Prediction — we will lose 2-4 games at home to losing teams this year. Each time, there will be great hand-wringing. We will also have more that are closer than they should be. We will also have more blowouts. We lead the league in 30 point wins. We will be fine, but you will feel better for having worried a little bit. It won’t make one iota of difference to how the team performs, any more than my optimism will, but you will feel like you’ve done your share, just like I do. It is important for a fan base to have worriers as well as optimists. I don’t know why it is important, but it is.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 22, 2008 3:16 PM PST up reply actions

If I remember right,

Even during the ‘Sheed era, we played down to lower tier teams. It happens in the NBA, otherwise teams like OKC, Minny, and us a few years ago would never win a game. I don’t really think it is anything to worry about. If we are consistently crushing those teams by ten, it it something to be really proud of, and time to start crowing about titles. Until then, lets be content with what we have.

by usdblazerfan on Dec 22, 2008 5:55 PM PST up reply actions

Nice job!

Some Variables -

1. How many games will Brandon miss from injuries? It would be tough to beat many teams without him.
2. GO’s rate of improvement? Will it plateau or continue to rise? I think the latter.
3. Rookie wall for Rudy? He may have experienced it already with the schedule. Can he recover? I think so.
4. Will Martell play this year? The 2nd injury was mysterious and worrisome. Batum may have to start all year, except for …
5. A trade before the deadline. I think more likely than not.

I’d be real happy with 50 wins, which would be better than I thought before the year started.

by BlazerFanSince1970 on Dec 22, 2008 2:46 PM PST reply actions

Good variables

1. I think we will be dangerous against losing teams even without Brandon, this year. We’ve got a lot of weapons, and there’s a good chance one of them has a game-winning night, even with Brandon out.
2. I also believe Greg will continue to improve. KP said it would take him 40 games to get into the swing of things. If that was right, we still have a ways to go.
3. Hard to read, with Rudy. If he provides nothing more than a 3 point threat off the bench this year, he is still valuable. I think we have a lot of good games coming from Rudy still this year. It will be very interesting to see how he performs if Brandon does go down for a few games.
4. Martell will probably play, but only if he is able to contribute. I think it is important to recognize that we are playing at a high level without him. If he doesn’t come back to a level where he helps, we should still, based on all the other factors, be able to cruise into the playoffs. If he comes back and earns playing time (which I am pretty sure he will), it will be because he will make us even better. This is a potential plus, but something we do not need to rely on to be a strong team.
5. Trade. This is a huge factor, and completely impossible to quantify. The better the team plays over the next 10-15 games, the less KP will want to disrupt chemistry with a blockbuster — and if Raef is included, it will be a big deal. I think if we do well in these tough home games coming up, a trade only happens if it is a big winner for us. Otherwise, KP will wait, use the insurance money for Raef to buy another first round pick or two, and use the cap space this summer.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 1:27 AM PST up reply actions

I knew you are a Quantum Statistics professor at The University of Edinburgh.

Sergio + Rudy = 16
Sergio + Bayless = 16
Batum 8+8=16

by amlmart1 on Dec 22, 2008 5:05 PM PST reply actions

He's crazy

"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'

by tominhawaii on Dec 23, 2008 7:14 AM PST up reply actions

Irrelevant

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 8:17 AM PST up reply actions

Oh good point

Jscot is crazy and irrelevant.

"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'

by tominhawaii on Dec 23, 2008 8:21 AM PST up reply actions

UPDATE with new stupid projections

Houston won at NJ last night. This means that now, magically, two of our future games have transformed from Cat 2 and Cat 4 into Cat 1 and Cat 3, because now NJ is a losing team. That means that instead of being likely to win one and lose the other, we are now statistically likely to win them both, according to the stupid projections! Yay! The Denver loss hardly even matters!

L@kers won at Memphis (yawn) and the Kings lost at the Spurs (bigger yawn).

The NJ loss means that Dallas’ loss at NJ is now Cat 3 instead of Cat 4. Hang onto your seats, because this is exciting stuff — it means that Dallas has improved projections, without having played a game, because one of the teams they played is now considered worse. You are reading this and saying, “I knew this Scot was out of his tree.” Yes, indeed, you were right about that, but this is not evidence of that fact. This is the beauty of stupid stat projections, and I hope everyone remembers it whenever someone tries to prove something to you in the fields of finance, politics, or sports with statistics (caveat emptor).

How does this magic work? Very simply, before NJ lost, Dallas was 2-3 in Cat 4 games, with 18 remaining. Because they have 18 Cat 4 games remaining, this projected to 7.2 more wins in these games. NOW, they are a .500 team in Cat 4s, which means the spreadsheet assures us they will win 9 of those remaining 18, a net gain of 1.8 wins! Go, Mavs!

Of course, this hurts them in the Cat 3 games, because they went 6-2 to 6-3. But because they only have 10 of these games left, their projected wins dropped from 7.5 to 6.67, a net loss of only 0.83. This is the magic of small sample sizes — in Cat 3, the sample size is decent, so a single additional loss doesn’t greatly impact the numbers, but in Cat 4, the sample size is small, so one game makes a huge difference.

Also, Dallas is pathetic (2-6) in home games against good teams, and undefeated against bad ones, so to shift their home game against NJ into Cat 1 is basically giving them an additional win, according to the spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet giveth (to Dallas), and the spreadsheet taketh away (from Phoenix). The Suns have 16 Cat 1 games left. Yesterday, the spreadsheet thought that Phoenix, having won all three of their Cat 1 games so far, would therefore continue to win 100%, and projected 16 more wins in that category. NOW, the spreadsheet tells us that Phoenix actually lost a Cat 1 game, to NJ (yesterday, that was a Cat 2 loss). The spreadsheet now projects 12 more wins in Cat 1 for Phoenix (which may actually be closer than 16).

This NJ loss has ripple effects throughout the spreadsheet, some pronounced, some not (this is one of the reasons I call them STUPID projections). Here is the update after games of 22 December.

1. L.A — 64.8 wins
2. Houston — 56.2 wins (their win plus NJ’s decline moves them up)
3. New Orleans — 56.1 wins (up about half of a win, due to NJ’s decline)
4. Portland — 55.9 wins (because our record in Cat 4s isn’t very good, and because we don’t have that many left, the loss didn’t hurt that much in the spreadsheet, and our two remaining NJ games are now theoretically easy)
5. Denver — 53.5 wins (that’s right, Denver now projects 3 full wins better than yesterday — but tonight is coming)
6. San Antonio — 52 wins
7. Dallas — 49.7 (a great night for them, moving up from borderline 8-9 to 7th seed without playing a game)
8. Phoenix — 48.9 (down 4.8 projected wins without playing a game)
9. Utah — 45.3 (down 1.7 projected wins without playing a game)

Unusually, we might get to play this same kind of game tonight. If Chicago wins at Detroit, they become a .500 team, and games shift category again. This kind of thing doesn’t happen very often. I might have to create six categories, to reflect winning teams, losing teams, and teams within 2-3 games of .500. But you would still have category shifts.

Also tonight, Utah plays at Milwaukie. The Bucks aren’t playing as poorly as some people expected. They are only 3 games below .500, but they’ve played a brutal schedule — 18 at home, 11 on the road. This may not be an easy game for the Jazz. Milwaukie is another team that could end up shifting categories. For those of us who use stats to make stupid projections, our work is never done.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 12:53 AM PST reply actions 2 recs

Dallas and Utah.....

…….appear to be in even more trouble than their current records would indicate. They have both struggled with fairly easy schedules. Utah has an excuse with injuries to both of their stars. Dallas, not so much.

It looks to me that San Antonio has righted their ship. Looks like a dog fight between Houston, NO, and Spurs for the Division crown.

Looks like Portland battling with Denver for the NW Division title. I expect it to be close. If the Blazers can win the Division, they will have the second or, more likely, third seed and home court for the first round. That would be huge for a team with no playoff experience. If we can’t keep up with Denver, we are probably looking at a 6th-8th seed with a very tough first round opponent.

Nice work, Jscot. Hope you will keep updating us as the season rolls along. Rec’d.

by upper left corner on Dec 23, 2008 9:43 AM PST reply actions

Bottom line:

I appreciate the analysis but there is only one category that amounts to much. Our record against the teams we are fighting with for a playoff spot (coincidentally the same teams we would face in the playoffs):

3-7

of games remaining against these same teams:

20.

My prediction (you can call yours a “projection” if you want, it is still just a prediction)

We have to finish stronger than 9-21 against these teams to make the playoffs or, even more importantly, to have any kind of chance to do something in the playoffs.

So, I wouldn’t plan on the playoffs just yet.

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 12:09 PM PST reply actions

sorry that is "# of games remaining..."

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 12:11 PM PST up reply actions

We have a great chance at the playoffs.

All of our losses to western contenders have been on the road. It’s not like they’ve been coming into the RG and winning. We lost to Phoenix on the road twice, Utah on the road twice, Denver once, LAL once, and NO once.

Is there shame in any of those losses? I’m pretty sure one Utah game and both Phoenix games were back to backs as well.

honor rasheed wallace

by Cablinasian on Dec 23, 2008 12:35 PM PST up reply actions

The Utah games weren't back to backs

but both Phoenix games were.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 2:34 PM PST up reply actions

Actually

After last night, we’re 4-7 against those teams. But we are 4-0 against them at home and 0-7 on the road, and obviously, we have more home games left against them than road games. If you want to project based on past performance, we should win all the rest of our home games against those teams and lose all the rest of the road games.

But guess what? If we only win 30% of our games against our rivals, and we continue to take care of business against the East and against losing teams as we have, we will finish ahead of at least one, and probably two, of our rivals, because some of them just aren’t doing as well as we are at those things. Not all of them will win 3 of 4 from Orlando and Miami. Utah has home losses to Orlando, Miami, Chicago, and NJ. We are 2-1 against those four teams at home, and I like our chances to be 3-1. I don’t really expect Utah to sweep in Florida, either.

“Projection” is appropriate because it is taking past performances and projecting them forward. It doesn’t really have any promise of accuracy, as I’ve stated and demonstrated, but projection is the right word.

Obviously, we have to do it on the court, but it would be extremely foolish to bet against the playoffs. Our position is ok, and there are many factors which are positive for us. The chances are very, very high that we’ll be there.

Dallas is 3-6 against Western contenders, with 5 of those games at home. Phoenix is 5-8. It’s impossible for every contender to have a good record against the other contenders, and we only need to beat out one of them.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 2:33 PM PST up reply actions

thanks for correction, Jscot

Forgot about the Phoenix win.

I like your post, and I personally understand the desire to feel some security in our playoff prospects. But, I’m afraid, there is none.

I understand what a projection is. In the general case, projections tend to be accurate (although 1/3 of the season feels a little thin as a sample). But they have little predictive accuracy in the specific case. This is why economics cannot predict an individual’s happiness or medical science an individual’s outcome with a treatment. This is a widely misunderstood weakness of statistics.

But setting aside my didacticism, I think I understand where you are coming from. We just want to make the playoffs this year right, everything else is secondary?

Do I have you right? Because if our goal is a championship, our performance against the big eight is pretty much all that matters. So if it’s not this year, at some point we are going to have to start competing against the grown-ups. 4-7 is not bad.

But I will go out on a limb and say if we we win 30% of our games against these teams, we will in fact not make the playoffs. For the simple reason that we are not as good as they are! This is the forest through the trees. If you are not as good, you don’t do as well!

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 3:26 PM PST up reply actions

But the four wins are at home

and the seven losses are away. So, if you were to extrapolate, then we would be .500 against the other eight.

honor rasheed wallace

by Cablinasian on Dec 23, 2008 4:04 PM PST up reply actions

and if we are come April,

we will certainly make the playoffs! One thing I’ve noticed, check the home and away losses of the top 8. It seems these good teams can win as readily on the road as at home…

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 4:23 PM PST up reply actions

and its interesting that jscot mentioned the records of Phoenix and Dallas

against the top 8. Because those are the teams that I hear most commonly mentioned as the ones we’ve got a good chance to beat out. It’s amazing to me that Phoenix is considered weaker having watched what it took for us to beat them at the RG last week. The Christmas game against Dallas will give us an important piece of the puzzle.

Guess my main point is that it isn’t that complicated. if you’re better than another team, that is demonstrated by beating them.

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 4:30 PM PST up reply actions

Your point about home/away losses of the top 8

is true but deceptive. N.O. is 7-4 on the road, but has a losing record against winning teams on the road.

And your final sentence is actually not true. If you are better than another team, that is demonstrated by winning more games than they do.

We split 2-2 against the L@kers last year, but anyone who claimed we were actually as good a team as they were, based on that, would be silly. It is an 82 game season.

And I would put Utah very much in the vulnerable category, even though their record against other Western contenders is pretty decent. The reason is that they have more bad losses and fewer quality wins than anyone. If you lose too many games (including some home games) to Milwaukie, NJ, Miami, Chicago, NY, Charlotte, and Washington, it doesn’t matter if you play at .500 against the other contenders. Utah will not win the division, and may not even make the playoffs, unless they exceed .500 against the Western playoff contenders the rest of the way — and that is going to be difficult because so many are on the road.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 11:37 PM PST up reply actions

good back and forth

in response to

If you are better than another team, that is demonstrated by winning more games than they do.

I would add, “that and beating them head to head.” How about a combination metric here? Quantifying success as both making the playoffs and advancing in the playoffs…

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 11:47 PM PST up reply actions

I'm not smart enough for that

Of course you are right, to advance you have to beat them head to head, and regular season success in doing so is a good predictor of postseason success.

So your focus on head-to-head is a good one for a team that expects to advance. But I only expect to advance on the following basis:
1. We get a top four seed, and manage to turn Portland into a fortress.
or
2. We hit young team magic, where everything clicks even though we lack experience.

But I expect to run into a veteran team that has been through it all and will smack us around and knock us out. I hope we get the experience of actually winning a series before that happens, but who knows? Our talent and depth make us very dangerous in a seven game series, and our youth and inexperience make us very vulnerable. We could make the WCF this year, and we could lose in the first round. Both of those are true whatever our seed. The latter is far more likely.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 24, 2008 12:14 AM PST up reply actions

Simply not true....

Very few teams are as good on the road as at home. Usually, these teams are either very elite teams or very veteran teams. Most good young clubs start winning at home before they learn to win consistently on the road.

by upper left corner on Dec 24, 2008 10:43 AM PST up reply actions

elite teams and veteran teams....

well, i believe that’s who we’re talking about. try reading the thread before commenting… :)

by Blazin' on Dec 24, 2008 12:54 PM PST up reply actions

Look......

I am the guy who originally came up with the categories Jscot is using in his post. I am familiar with the thread and the concepts.

My point is not an opinion; it is a fact. Over 95% of all seasons, compiled by all teams in the NBA, show significantly better performance at home than on the road. Occasionally, there is a rare team that performs as well on the road as at home. Those rare teams are either super elite teams the kind that win over 65 games a season, or they are aging, veteran teams like San Antonio who loose their edge at home but are still capable of winning any game on the road.

My point is that it is crazy to think, or expect, that the Blazers need to win a majority of their games on the road against other playoff teams, in order to have a chance to get to the playoffs, or to be successful in the playoffs. Boston lost most of their playoff games on the road last year and still won the title. See my comment below entitled “I think you are missing the point.”

by upper left corner on Dec 24, 2008 1:16 PM PST up reply actions

Hey upper left-

No where do I say that the Blazers need to win a majority of their games to make the playoffs… My point is simple. To compete against the elite teams of the West, you have to sometimes beat them! It’s not complicated. I know they’re young, I know it will take time, I am very happy with their progress up until now. But winning only 30% against your peers means they are not your peers!

Actually, if you’ve listened to post-game interviews with Nate and/or Brandon, they are saying the same thing. To get to the next level, we have to at some point start competing with the big eight. It is inescapable. When you hear things like 11 straight losses to Phoenix. 10 out of 11 to Denver, I think you know what i am talking about. We are coming out of a period of being dominated. It is a mindset/confidence thing. Of course our record is important. But there is history in the Western Conference to consider as well.

I am not faulting you and jscot’s analysis. Merely pointing out an alternate perspective. And one that I think is consonant with an competitor’s perspective. In the standings, one win equals another. From an athlete’s point of view, this is simply not the case.

Anyway, appreciate the conversation…

by Blazin' on Dec 24, 2008 1:38 PM PST up reply actions

Nate and Brandon

are saying exactly what I want them to. While they say that the goal is the playoffs, down inside they want more, they want to be elite. So of course, they talk about taking it to the next level.

But for this team, the next level is elite. We are already a good, solid playoff team. The record and quality of schedule is evident. There is a reason Hollinger has us over 90% in his playoff odds — borderline playoff teams don’t get that number.

I’m not saying we won’t be borderline, but I am saying we’re playing much better than that so far, and if we continue, we’re easily in.

But none of that changes the validity of what you, Nate, and Brandon are saying — we want to go to the next level, and to do that we need to play .500 or better against the playoff teams. We are doing that, roughly, when you adjust for home/away, though.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 24, 2008 1:44 PM PST up reply actions

+1

by upper left corner on Dec 24, 2008 2:23 PM PST up reply actions

10 of 11 to Denver?

Impossible, we beat them twice last year. And we’ve won a crazy amount of our home games against them.

honor rasheed wallace

by Cablinasian on Dec 24, 2008 1:57 PM PST up reply actions

thought

i hear that stat….maybe it was in Denver. You see why I am not a big stat person! Requires me to pay close attention1 ;)

by Blazin' on Dec 24, 2008 2:09 PM PST up reply actions

We've not had much success in Denver

but they’ve had little in Portland.

The teams we’ve really struggled against are Phoenix and S.A., and we broke both streaks this year. We also have not done real well against Houston, and broke that one as well.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 24, 2008 2:14 PM PST up reply actions

6-1 at home against winning teams.....

Hang on for the next couple of weeks we have a bunch of tough ones at home. These games will give us a pretty good idea of whether or not we are ready to compete against the elite teams.

Usually you have to beat’em at home before you can learn how to compete against them on the road.

I don’t think we have any real disagreement, just a difference of emphasis.

Don’t Worry, Be Happy. Unless our play deteriorates significantly, or we have major injuries; we are going to make the playoffs. Our guys have laid a solid foundation…..

by upper left corner on Dec 24, 2008 2:29 PM PST up reply actions

thx ulc

is that where your seats are at?
Truth be told, I couldn’t be happier with the team, because watching them figure out how to play with the elite teams is going to be very interesting.

And I like them.

Lots of great competition lies ahead…

by Blazin' on Dec 24, 2008 10:21 PM PST up reply actions

What you are overlooking

is that, since we are doing well against the rest of the league, we only have to be within a couple of wins of only one team in the head-to-head variety to make the playoffs. It is almost guaranteed that 2 or more other teams will not be better than 40% against the other Western rivals. That means that even at 30%, we’ll be within a game or two of them — and we have those nice road wins at Orlando, Miami, and Detroit that they can’t match.

In any event, we’re now 5-7, which is 42%. At that rate, we’ll stroll in, as long as we take care of business against weaker teams.

But in the larger picture, you are right. We aren’t a championship team right now, and the likelihood of us making that jump before the end of the season is pretty low. The goal this year is to make the playoffs. If we can keep winning our home games, we’ve got a good chance at a top 4 seed, and if we get that, we have home court advantage in the first round, so we have a good chance to get to the second round. That would be a very, very successful season. But just to make the playoffs in the West is an excellent accomplishment — for this year.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 11:27 PM PST up reply actions

some voodoo method...

Nate’s had this thing with his record, right? He’s added 10 victories per year. Seems like a pretty good predictor.

51 wins. Maybe 52. Isn’t that what you really think is going to happen?

by Blazin' on Dec 23, 2008 11:55 PM PST up reply actions

No, I predicted 55

or maybe a couple more wins at the start of the season, and I’m sticking to it.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 24, 2008 12:14 AM PST up reply actions

Dude, Way to work !

The post and the running commentary.
That’s outstanding !
Now,

DOWN WITH COINCAST !

It's GO time !

by walkoff41 on Dec 23, 2008 5:04 PM PST up reply actions

I think you are missing the point.....

1) All but the most elite teams loose a majority of their road games against good teams;

2) Portland has played more road games than home games against quality teams;

3) The Blazers are 6-1 against good teams at home;

4) You do not have to win many road games to be successful in the playoffs. Having home court is critical. Being able to steal a road victory now and again is critical, but don’t expect to win many road victories in the playoffs. Even Boston had a lousy road record in the playoffs (I think they were 3-8).

Winning against lesser teams is important to building a good record and getting home court advantage in the playoffs.

by upper left corner on Dec 24, 2008 10:38 AM PST up reply actions

rec for length

now i’m going to read it.

@('.')@

by JTDuck22 on Dec 23, 2008 12:41 PM PST reply actions

This is a family blog!

And what are you doing making comments to pad jscot’s ego?

"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'

by tominhawaii on Dec 23, 2008 1:14 PM PST up reply actions

Ego padding

would be a pretty pointless reason to rec a post, because my ego is beyond padding.

I do have a long post. I’m not sure why you mind someone noticing. I haven’t really scrutinized yours, but I doubt it is as long. Yours got more comments, but I think it is just that mine has stimulated wordless admiration. The recs tell the story.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 2:40 PM PST up reply actions

Oh Yeah?

I could blog deeper, longer, and harder than you. Besides, it’s not the size of the fanpost that matters, it’s the stimulation in it.

"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'

by tominhawaii on Dec 23, 2008 2:52 PM PST up reply actions

No doubt

that your fanpost stimulated angst and controversy.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 24, 2008 1:38 AM PST up reply actions

I stick to my strengths.

It’s better to drive to the basket and draw a foul than settle for a pull up jumper.

"There is a difference between having two guys banging down low and having two guys who can bang down low." - Blazin'

by tominhawaii on Dec 24, 2008 2:40 AM PST up reply actions

Nice work jscot

I still see us getting the 4 or 5 seed.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Dec 23, 2008 2:45 PM PST reply actions

ps:

While this tool is not that accurate right now (as you note), its still fun and interesting… and once we hit the stretch run (with perhaps 20 games left), we’ll have much bigger sample sizes and this tool will be quite useful.

Boomshakalaka

by jksnake99 on Dec 23, 2008 3:21 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah

Bigger sample sizes help. It still won’t accurately reflect injury impacts or improvements over the season. Furthermore, the sample size of remaining games is small, and so results can be skewed by outlier games. It isn’t useful for predicting one or two games. The only real value, prediction-wise, is if you have played a significant number of games in a particular category AND have a significant number left.

For instance, in Cat 4 games, we’ve played 11 (3-8) and have 11 left. That makes it pretty reasonable to expect that we’re going to win more than one of those 11, but probably not more than 4-5 of them. It’s not much use for predicting the next 2, but it does give us a general picture of our performance in that type of game, and over a large enough sample, we would expect that to work out.

So perhaps it’s greatest usefulness (as a projecting tool) is when we hit the 40-50 game mark. But I believe the categorical breakdowns are always useful in assessing the difficulty of the remaining schedule, for us and others.

And once you get 15-20 games into the season, it is, as you said, fun and interesting up until at least the 70 game mark. Then, you just start to look at individual games ahead.

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 23, 2008 11:47 PM PST up reply actions

Is there any chance we can get a weekly feature?

It doesn’t have to be this in depth and go through the different categories… It would be fun to see a “just-for-giggles” playoff seeding prediction after each week.

Jscot’s Power Rankings > Marc Stein’s Power Rankings.

honor rasheed wallace

by Cablinasian on Dec 23, 2008 2:57 PM PST reply actions

Just for giggles

Probably can do that, but it’s a little crazy because of the wild fluctuations. NJ became a .500 team again tonight, sending the projections crazy again, while Chicago stared .500 in the face and recoiled from such an enormous step forward. We still don’t really know if these teams, and Milwaukie, are winning or losing teams, and Miami could get dragged into that discussion as well.

So here goes. NJ’s win zaps Dallas, Utah, us and Denver a little bit, and helps Phoenix. The Spurs managed to hold off Minnesota in a close one at home (that’s for everyone worried about our close win against them). Houston lost at Cleveland, Mavs beat the Grizzlies, and of course we beat Denver. LA won at N.O., which hits the Hornets because it was a home loss, and confirms that LA is a good road team as well, boosting their projection nicely. Utah lost to Milwaukie, which looks bad on the spreadsheet because the Bucks are still a losing team, but that may change soon. Even so, the Jazz were helped because of NJ’s win.

Our projection changed not at all, because the benefit of the win was cancelled by the impact of our two future games against NJ now being against a winning team. But the teams just ahead of us lost. Denver took a hit. Here’s the numbers after the games of 12/23:
1. LA — 66.2 wins
2. Portland — 55.9 wins.
3. Houston — 55.1
4. Phoenix — 53.7 .
5. N.O. — 53.6
6. Denver — 51.6
7. S.A. — 50.9
8. Dallas — 48.0
9. Utah — 46.0

If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President

by jscot on Dec 24, 2008 1:01 AM PST up reply actions