BBR Rankings: Schedule-Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Ratings (February 18, 2011)

Posted by Neil Paine on February 18, 2011

2010-11 NBA power rankings through the games played on February 17, 2011:

Rank	Prev	Team	Cnf	Div	W	L	WPct	Offense	Rk	Prv	Defense	Rk	Prv	Overall
1	1	Miami Heat	E	SE	41	15	0.732	4.06	3	3	-3.95	5	6	8.01
2	2	San Antonio Spurs	W	SW	46	10	0.821	3.85	4	4	-3.68	7	7	7.53
3	4	Boston Celtics	E	A	40	14	0.741	0.33	14	13	-6.29	2	2	6.62
4	3	Los Angeles Lakers	W	P	38	19	0.667	4.29	2	2	-1.68	11	10	5.97
5	6	Chicago Bulls	E	C	38	16	0.704	-0.58	18	21	-6.44	1	1	5.86
6	5	Orlando Magic	E	SE	36	21	0.632	1.30	10	11	-4.54	4	5	5.84
7	7	Dallas Mavericks	W	SW	40	16	0.714	2.07	9	9	-1.74	9	11	3.80
8	8	New Orleans Hornets	W	SW	33	25	0.569	-1.24	22	22	-3.72	6	4	2.49
9	10	Oklahoma City Thunder	W	NW	35	19	0.648	3.58	5	5	1.12	17	17	2.46
10	9	Denver Nuggets	W	NW	32	25	0.561	5.00	1	1	2.61	24	22	2.39
11	11	Memphis Grizzlies	W	SW	31	26	0.544	-1.05	21	20	-2.77	8	8	1.72
12	13	Philadelphia 76ers	E	A	27	29	0.482	-0.24	16	16	-1.71	10	12	1.47
13	15	Portland Trail Blazers	W	NW	32	24	0.571	0.79	13	15	-0.10	15	13	0.88
14	12	Houston Rockets	W	SW	26	31	0.456	3.35	6	6	2.52	23	21	0.84
15	14	Atlanta Hawks	E	SE	34	21	0.618	0.28	15	14	-0.33	13	14	0.61
Rank	Prev	Team	Cnf	Div	W	L	WPct	Offense	Rk	Prv	Defense	Rk	Prv	Overall
16	16	New York Knickerbockers	E	A	28	26	0.519	2.51	8	8	2.17	19	24	0.34
17	19	Indiana Pacers	E	C	24	30	0.444	-1.84	23	24	-1.45	12	9	-0.39
18	17	Utah Jazz	W	NW	31	26	0.544	1.17	11	10	1.67	18	18	-0.49
19	18	Phoenix Suns	W	P	27	27	0.500	2.79	7	7	3.34	26	27	-0.55
20	20	Milwaukee Bucks	E	C	21	34	0.382	-5.81	30	30	-4.70	3	3	-1.11
21	22	Golden State Warriors	W	P	26	29	0.473	0.99	12	12	3.56	27	28	-2.57
22	23	Charlotte Bobcats	E	SE	24	32	0.429	-3.20	25	25	-0.12	14	15	-3.09
23	21	Los Angeles Clippers	W	P	21	35	0.375	-0.75	19	17	2.40	22	20	-3.15
24	24	Detroit Pistons	E	C	21	36	0.368	-0.55	17	18	3.78	28	26	-4.33
25	25	Minnesota Timberwolves	W	NW	13	43	0.232	-2.50	24	23	3.21	25	25	-5.71
26	26	Sacramento Kings	W	P	13	40	0.245	-4.83	28	28	0.98	16	16	-5.82
27	27	Toronto Raptors	E	A	15	41	0.268	-0.98	20	19	4.84	29	29	-5.82
28	28	Washington Wizards	E	SE	15	39	0.278	-3.99	26	27	2.33	21	19	-6.32
29	29	New Jersey Nets	E	A	17	40	0.298	-4.31	27	26	2.25	20	23	-6.56
30	30	Cleveland Cavaliers	E	C	10	46	0.179	-5.16	29	29	5.26	30	30	-10.42
		HCA												3.38
		LgRtg												107.83

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

This entry was posted on Friday, February 18th, 2011 at 9:32 am and is filed under BBR Rankings, SRS, Statgeekery. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

12 Responses to “BBR Rankings: Schedule-Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Ratings (February 18, 2011)”

kevin Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 12:03 pm
Why is Miami ahead of Boston when they have lost all three head-to-heads against them?

I mean, stats are great and all but stats are supposed to bear some relationship with reality.
Neil Paine Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
This system takes into account all games, not just head-to-heads between teams. And it factors in efficiency differential.

If this were something like Beatpaths, then Boston would unquestionably rank ahead of Miami. But that's a retrodictive ranking; a predictive one (like this) takes into account point differential, and it uses hundreds of games worth of evidence rather than merely looking at three.
Greyberger Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Re:1, if that bothers you, visit the Hollinger rankings...
Jason J Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 3:32 pm
I gotta say also that I can remember too many times when a team lost a season series to an opponent and then beat them in the playoffs to put too much stock in head to head encounters.

One prominent example would be the year Jordan hit "The Shot" to get past Cleveland. The Cavs actually swept the season series (Jordan then guaranteed Chicago would win the playoff series, so it's a good thing he made that shot...).
huevonkiller Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 7:11 pm
Don't try to make any series a lock, when the point differential and sample size is so small.
P Middy Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
I tell ya, if those Bucks could make a jumpshot, they'd me right in the mix. Their D is the bomb.
Neil Paine Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 9:36 pm
Seems like Scott Skiles teams have a tendency to inexplicably tank offensively due to poor jump-shooting... After winning 49 with a younger-than-average core in 2007, the 2008 Bulls seemed poised for a great season. Instead, their offense collapsed under the weight of bricked J's, and they went 33-49 (with Skiles himself being canned following a 9-16 start).
KevinG Says:
February 18th, 2011 at 11:36 pm
"a predictive one (like this) takes into account point differential, and it uses hundreds of games worth of evidence rather than merely looking at three."

What do you mean by predictive, Neil? If you mean that present point differential predicts future point differential, then you're probably right.

But I think of power rankings as meaning something like the chances a team can win a championship, or the likelihood it can beat other teams in the playoffs. Miami has had trouble with Boston and I don't see how having a better point differential is going to change that. That Miami can beat Cleveland by 28 while Boston only beats them by 19 is nice for Miami but I don't see how predictive it is in something like a power ranking.
huevonkiller Says:
February 19th, 2011 at 2:07 am
Boston beats them by an average of 19? I didn't know that.

It favors Miami because the point differential isn't far enough to exclude luck. In your case Boston has won two close games, and the Heat are better than at the beginning of the year. When they lost 2 of those 3 games.
huevonkiller Says:
February 19th, 2011 at 2:10 am
http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=8831

If Miami loses to the Wizards in December (they stole that game), and beat the Celtics by 1 in their last game, what does that mean? People don't want to admit it but a small point differential comes down to luck. If Boston is really better they'll keep decisively beating Miami, and I don't see that.
huevonkiller Says:
February 19th, 2011 at 2:18 am
http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=8260

#1 Yeah, your "reality" was probably not nuanced enough to rank them properly in November.
Anon Says:
February 19th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
"But I think of power rankings as meaning something like the chances a team can win a championship, or the likelihood it can beat other teams in the playoffs."

Um, which is what point differential is for in the first place?

This is just annoying now. Congratulations for being 3-0 against the Heat, in which two of those wins CAME AGAINST AT TEAM THAT HAD BARELY PLAYED TOGETHER ON THE COURT early in the season and another win at home by an epic smackdown of three points. Funny how the hypocrites in the media bash the Heat for their record vs. Boston and yet talk about the Lakers being favorites in a series with the Spurs in a series, with SA taking both games they've played this season. And then use the Lakers titles from PAST SEASONS (which are irrelevant to the current season) as the rationale for their pick.

You've seen posts on point differential being the best predictor of wins, and another post about the importance of HCA (which is implicity linked to point differential, since higher PT usually translates to more wins and helps you obtain HCA). Boston is a great team and can take a series against Miami...but so can Miami.

« NY Times: Sizing Up the All-Stars

Who Are the Most Similar Players to This Year’s All-Stars? »