BBR Rankings: Schedule-Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Ratings (February 4, 2011)
Posted by Neil Paine on February 4, 2011
2010-11 NBA power rankings through the games played on February 3, 2011:
|2||2||San Antonio Spurs||W||SW||41||8||0.837||3.65||4||3||-3.60||6||7||7.25|
|4||4||Los Angeles Lakers||W||P||34||16||0.680||4.70||2||2||-1.58||11||11||6.27|
|7||7||New Orleans Hornets||W||SW||32||19||0.627||-1.52||22||21||-5.10||3||2||3.58|
|10||10||Oklahoma City Thunder||W||NW||31||17||0.646||3.43||6||7||1.34||17||17||2.09|
|14||16||Portland Trail Blazers||W||NW||26||23||0.531||-0.35||16||16||-0.88||12||13||0.52|
|16||15||New York Knickerbockers||E||A||25||23||0.521||2.64||8||9||2.32||20||19||0.32|
|21||21||Los Angeles Clippers||W||P||19||29||0.396||-0.28||15||17||2.59||23||22||-2.86|
|22||22||Golden State Warriors||W||P||21||27||0.438||1.06||13||12||4.04||27||27||-2.99|
|29||27||New Jersey Nets||E||A||15||35||0.300||-3.88||25||26||2.34||21||18||-6.21|
To read more about the methodology and what these numbers mean, click here.
February 4th, 2011 at 11:14 am
The Cavs have breached -11!
February 4th, 2011 at 11:52 am
Ha, well they were actually -11.16 two weeks ago:
So their current -11.06 is actually an improvement.
February 4th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
They're sort of bad.
Have the top 6 separated from the field permanently?
February 4th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
I realize we're not measuring win/loss here, but for a 29-21 team, the Jazz rank awfully low.
February 4th, 2011 at 2:22 pm
#3 - It depends, I wonder how difficult it would be to move +/- 1.8 points in the ratings over the final 30 games of the season.
#4 - Utah's been pretty fortunate to be 29-21. They've played more like a 25-25 team.
February 5th, 2011 at 12:29 am
I knew Chicago's defense was good, but I'm surprised they're better at defense than the Lakers or anybody is on offense.
Also interesting to see the Spurs and Heat as such balanced teams, my perception was the Spurs were better on offense and the Heat on D.
February 5th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Why are these ratings slightly different than the ratings filed under LEAGUE?
February 5th, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Is this right? Love is the only 20 and 15 guy to have made a three?
February 5th, 2011 at 8:16 pm
#8 - It's true... In fact, he and Moses are the only guys to average 20 & 15 in the 3-point era, period. It was so much easier to put up those kinds of numbers in earlier seasons because the pace was so fast and FG% was so low. Love plays in an extremely fast-paced environment by 2011 standards, but the T-Wolves' league-leading 86.1 FGA/G would rank last in the league in 1961 -- by 18.7 FGA/G! Let that sink in for a second: the slowest team in 1961 took almost 20 more shots per game than the fastest team in 2011.
#7 - Because these are based on points scored/allowed per 100 possessions, and those are based on points scored/allowed per game. These are pace-neutral and therefore more accurate, but we can't calculate them for seasons prior to 1987, so using per-game averages is more useful for all of pro basketball history.
February 6th, 2011 at 1:21 am
If two teams with very different average paces play, wouldn't the per game stats also be useful because the teams would tend to drag each into an average of each other's pace.
February 6th, 2011 at 11:25 pm
Just wanted to let you guys know that your feedback system isn't working (at least for me it isn't). I've been getting an internal server error for about a week now. I'll post my suggestion here for the time being:
I noticed that you have Landry Fields listed as a forward only. He's started nearly every game for the knicks at SG this year, and is routinely listed as a G or G-F on other sites. See here:
I thought it'd make sense to make the change as he's routinely touted as leading all guards in rebounding. Thanks.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:42 am
I think we might actually add some detailed positional info soon (i.e., PG/SG/SF/PF/C). Stay tuned.
Also, I'll look into the feedback system issue.
February 7th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
PG/SG/SF/PF/C would be boss!
February 7th, 2011 at 3:40 pm
I just updated my rest-adjusted team ratings; I also moved to using an exponent of 2 after doing research on that. (Basically, these ratings should now match Neil's above, except for the rest adjustment). I also added all data points back to December 1st for margin, offensive rating, defensive rating, and pace, and put them in a spreadsheet. The associated Google Motion Chart helps us see... that Utah's defense has fallen off a cliff.