You Are Here > Basketball-Reference.com > BBR Blog > NBA and College Basketball Analysis

SITE NEWS: We are moving all of our site and company news into a single blog for Sports-Reference.com. We'll tag all Basketball-Reference content, so you can quickly and easily find the content you want.

Also, our existing Basketball-Reference blog rss feed will be redirected to the new site's feed.

Basketball-Reference.com // Sports Reference

For more from Neil, check out his new work at BasketballProspectus.com.

BBR Rankings: Schedule-Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Ratings (January 21, 2011)

Posted by Neil Paine on January 21, 2011

2010-11 NBA power rankings through the games played on January 20, 2011:

Rank Prev Team Cnf Div W L WPct Offense Rk Prv Defense Rk Prv Overall
1 1 Miami Heat E SE 30 13 0.698 3.75 5 4 -4.14 5 5 7.88
2 2 San Antonio Spurs W SW 36 6 0.857 4.22 3 1 -3.57 7 8 7.79
3 3 Boston Celtics E A 32 9 0.780 2.11 10 10 -4.90 2 2 7.02
4 4 Los Angeles Lakers W P 31 13 0.705 4.50 2 2 -1.83 11 11 6.34
5 6 Chicago Bulls E C 29 14 0.674 -1.64 21 20 -6.74 1 1 5.09
6 5 Orlando Magic E SE 27 15 0.643 1.41 11 11 -3.63 6 6 5.04
7 7 Dallas Mavericks W SW 27 15 0.643 0.82 14 13 -2.35 10 9 3.17
8 8 Denver Nuggets W NW 24 17 0.585 4.56 1 3 1.49 17 19 3.07
9 10 New Orleans Hornets W SW 27 16 0.628 -1.97 23 23 -4.50 4 4 2.53
10 9 Atlanta Hawks E SE 28 15 0.651 1.16 12 12 -1.12 12 13 2.28
11 12 Oklahoma City Thunder W NW 27 15 0.643 3.56 7 7 1.42 16 18 2.13
12 11 Utah Jazz W NW 27 15 0.643 3.56 6 8 1.75 19 16 1.82
13 14 Portland Trail Blazers W NW 24 20 0.545 0.30 16 16 -0.88 13 12 1.19
14 15 Houston Rockets W SW 20 23 0.465 3.24 8 9 2.18 22 23 1.06
15 16 Memphis Grizzlies W SW 19 23 0.452 -1.82 22 21 -2.67 8 10 0.85
Rank Prev Team Cnf Div W L WPct Offense Rk Prv Defense Rk Prv Overall
16 13 New York Knickerbockers E A 22 19 0.537 2.60 9 5 2.28 24 22 0.33
17 17 Milwaukee Bucks E C 15 24 0.385 -5.15 28 29 -4.83 3 3 -0.32
18 18 Philadelphia 76ers E A 17 25 0.405 -1.01 19 17 -0.39 15 14 -0.62
19 19 Indiana Pacers E C 16 23 0.410 -3.70 24 24 -2.60 9 7 -1.10
20 20 Phoenix Suns W P 19 21 0.475 4.00 4 6 6.01 30 30 -2.01
21 21 Golden State Warriors W P 18 23 0.439 1.04 13 15 3.88 27 26 -2.84
22 22 Los Angeles Clippers W P 16 26 0.381 -0.90 18 22 1.96 20 17 -2.86
23 24 Charlotte Bobcats E SE 17 24 0.415 -4.67 27 26 -0.43 14 15 -4.24
24 26 Detroit Pistons E C 15 27 0.357 -0.64 17 18 3.66 25 27 -4.30
25 23 Toronto Raptors E A 13 29 0.310 0.38 15 14 4.73 29 29 -4.35
26 25 Minnesota Timberwolves W NW 10 33 0.233 -1.44 20 19 3.85 26 25 -5.28
27 27 Washington Wizards E SE 12 28 0.300 -3.94 25 25 2.26 23 21 -6.20
28 28 New Jersey Nets E A 11 31 0.262 -4.32 26 27 2.03 21 20 -6.34
29 29 Sacramento Kings W P 9 31 0.225 -5.22 29 28 1.64 18 24 -6.85
30 30 Cleveland Cavaliers E C 8 33 0.195 -6.44 30 30 4.72 28 28 -11.16
HCA 3.68
LgRtg 107.51

To read more about the methodology and what these numbers mean, click here.

ShareThis

7 Responses to “BBR Rankings: Schedule-Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Ratings (January 21, 2011)”

  1. Garron Says:

    Was just wondering, if team X has 7 points, and team Y has 6 points, whats the points per possession advantage that team X has over team Y in a neutral field? Just trying to put the numbers into context

  2. DSMok1 Says:

    That's points per 100 possessions. Most teams run around 92 possessions per game.

    If the Heat (7.88) were playing the Lakers (6.34) on a neutral court, the Heat would be expected to win by about 1.54 points per 100 possessions played, or probably around 1.4 points per game.

    The home court advantage is added on to the 100 possession number either direction--so Miami would be favored by (1.54+3.68=5.22pts) per 100 poss. at home.

  3. Greyberger Says:

    Good gravy the Cavs are bad. There goes the Kings' pick.

  4. DSMok1 Says:

    Neil, remember our earlier discussion about |residual|^2 vs. other exponents? I am running some out-of-sample analyses on last year's data and am getting some interesting results.

    It's appearing so far that while my choice of ^1.5 was quite poor, ^2 is not the best either--something in the range of ^2.35 was best in my first test. I'll conduct more and eventually post on my blog and attempt to interpret.

  5. yariv Says:

    I personally would stick with L2 norms, they are widely used and I believe there is a theoretical statistical reason for this (although I'm not sure, probably because they are tied to averages. L1 norms are tied to medians). If there is a strong (statistically) evidence that some other value is significantly better predictor, I might consider it, but I would require it to be quite strong.

  6. DSMok1 Says:

    Yep, Yariv, L2 is tied to arithmetic mean and L1 to median. What I was investigating was whether, because team performance is not normally distributed, it is beneficial to adjust for the skew somewhat by using a value on the median side of the arithmetic mean or on the opposite side of the arithmetic mean from the median. Further research is hinting that, while exponents above 2 tend to be better than 2, it's not a big difference.

  7. joe Says:

    wow, the cavs are really bad. does anyone know what their ranking was last year? i would guess that this is the biggest one year turnaround in nba history.