[ESPN]Hollinger: 1-6 Rockets still better than Jazz, Hawks, Spurs

I agree with this.

Rockets fans are fawning over the Jazz the same way they're hating their own team.

"Anyone who doesn't label them contenders should be shot?"
I have news for some people; the first 10 games of the season are not indicative of how you will be at playoff time. That holds true even if you beat the Heat Superfriends, who are also finding their own way, at this point.

 

LOL. Smartass DD.

 

Agree, the team is out of sorts with Yao's limited minutes and everyone knowing their roles. Objectively, they could easily be 5-2.

 

all these stats and formulas dont get us into the playoffs. a losing record is still a losing record. doesn't matter how close the point margin or difficulty of schedule was.

 

These stats mean nothing with small sample size.

On a side note, the so-called best division in the NBA (the one with Miami, Orlando and Atalanta) is a combined 0-10 against contenders besides themselves. Lol @ hype.

 

For what is worth, this is Hollinger explanation. Keep in mind, this was before the game in Washington:

"The Rockets are 1-5, which seemingly makes them an odd choice to rank ninth in a 30-team league. But if we look at their schedule and scoring margins, the ranking is completely justified.

Houston's losses were to No. 2-ranked L.A. (by two points on the road), No. 3 New Orleans, No. 4 Denver and No. 13 San Antonio (in double overtime on the road after losing both starting guards in the first half). The only loss to a team outside the top 10 was a four-point defeat in Golden State -- no slouch itself at No. 17 -- on the second night of a back-to-back. Meanwhile, the Rockets' lone win was by 26 points.

Even if you eliminate that game, given that it came against a glorified D-League franchise, and just focus on the 0-5 start, Houston rates well. The Rockets lost all five games by a combined 30 points to teams with a record of 22-6 when they weren't playing the Timberwolves. Basically, every shred of evidence supports the notion that they're a quality team despite their 0-5 start, and as the schedule turns friendlier later this month, their record should even out accordingly"

 

This formula should be reworked, because there is no way we are the 12th best team in the NBA right now- I don't care what the margin of victory is

 

The formula makes perfect sense if you look at it at the end of the season, but it's very meaningless in the early part of the season. The smaller the sample size, the less SOS means. That's why college football ranking are such a joke.

 

Wait for "Rockets still better than all the teams that made the play-offs."

 

Yes is funny how Atlanta was beating nobodies and getting all hype up, now they face 3 decent teams and they can beat any of them.

 

Not to mention it was a comeback win. I think they were down like 15-20 points against both teams. Pretty impressive. As much as i hate the Jazz the team has great chemistry under Sloan.

 

yes, we would all love to be 5-1 even if our point differential was -45. but if i told you there was a 5-1 team that won all of it's games by 1 and lost the other game by 50, and it was against some weak teams and then said you had to bet how they would do over the course of the rest of the season, what would you predict? that they were 5-1 and thus going on to a 68 win season because stats mean nothing, or that they were a team that apparently plays a lot of close games, even not against very good teams, and that the bounces would probably start to equal out against them at the ends of games and they'd probably finish somewhere around, or maybe a little below .500?

sure, maybe you don't. but 7 games certainly isn't enough. the rockets have had plenty of recent seasons (for whatever reason) where they started off with seemingly no chemistry, no cohesion, and no set lineup that knew what it was doing, and then over the course of the first 2 months they developed into a team with tons of chemistry capable of winning plenty of games (when healthy).

as for Hollinger (and really it's just his formula), not knowing what it's talking about (and after 7-9 games, it's kind of like looking at the first BCS computer rankings), would you bet on teams finishing closer to their current spots in the standings or closer to their spots predicted by hollinger's formula, even with such a small amount of data being plugged in so far?

assuming we don't face tons of injuries (never a safe bet for the rockets), i'm guessing we'll be closer to .500 than .143 by the end of the season.

 

For those who say screw stats and just watch the game, please re-watch the first game of the season then.

Do you guys seriously believe that a 1-6 team could come within a couple of missed point blank layups from beating the defending champions in their own home court?

 

i believe these rankings actually do a pretty good job of predicting playoff success.

I believe that the best showing that it had was when the formula predicted that the spurs were the best team in the league in 07 when everyone picked the mavs.

the big thing is the formula takes into account is win margin. if you win by 2 you won by luck (which is not to say that you deserved to lose, just that either team could have won)

 

Praises doesnt get you anymore but losing does

 

while i agree with the rest of your post, i think this particular "success" of point differential/hollinger's ratings is overblown because the mavericks weren't knocked out by the spurs team with the superior point differential. they were knocked out by a golden state team that barely made the playoffs but who the mavs went 0-3 against in the regular season and who was by far the biggest matchup problem there was for the mavs. all that proved was that the spurs were the best team left and then they won the title. it would be like giving us credit for finally overcoming the sonics in 1994 even though it was denver that beat them.

 

Great idea! Let's call it the BCS.

 

New England Patriots 18-1.

Not enough sample points. LOL. I refuse to concede.

 

Pretty sure our team doesn't have the will to come back from 15+ down, and beat Miami + Orlando.

I DO think this team is better than 2-6 though.

 

This happens all the time. Historically great teams play close during the regular season with even the very worst teams.

the 1996 Chicago Bulls...who went 72-10...lost to the Toronto Raptors. the Raptors were a 30 win team that season. they lost at home to the Charlotte Hornets, who finished .500 that year.

So yes...I believe a 1-6 team could come within a couple of missed point blank layups from beating the defending champions in their own home court
--- and you should believe it too, because you saw it all happen with your own eyes. It's exactly what DID happen.