meh, the Texans was like top 1-2 in traditional rankings for most of the season despite troubles brewing ever since the bye week. Those rankings are pointless because they basically reflect the record and not with any actual thought into how well a team plays.
The Rockets SOS in the last 10 games is significantly higher than any of the other teams in the top 15, and we went 7-3 with a +7.4 margin of victory. That's pretty impressive. But our fast paced, run-and-gun style would likely be much less effective in the playoffs (should we make it) against teams that are prepared for us. That element is missing from these rankings.
question for fantasy basketball guys: I just saw on the espn player rater that in the last 7 games (the first tab up top) that Lin was ranked 1st among all pgs, and for all positions sits behind Lebron (#1) Harden (#2) Durant (#3) Lin (#4). Even with his horrible start he's tied for 6th among pgs. What does that exactly mean? Thanks in advance. http://games.espn.go.com/fba/playerrater?&splitTypeId=1&slotCategoryId=0
I disagree. Finals appearances quirks aside, there's nothing to suggest a fast paced team can't advance in the playoffs. With last year's Spurs, Nash's Suns, Webber's Kings are being major players despite their ridiculous pace. If we keep up this play, I give us a puncher's chance against any team other than the Thunder, and to lesser extent Spurs and Clippers. Some teams simply don't have the personnel to deal with a fast break team. I think Nash's Suns usually killed us during the JVG days despite our vaunted defense.
The Suns were very fast-paced, but they had a very good half-court offense to complement their transition game. Their pick-and-roll attack with Nash, Amare, Marion, and the 3-point shooters on the wings was a nightmare to matchup against. We're really good at pushing the pace and getting easy scores. But when our initial attack is stopped by the opposing team's transition D, we become much easier to guard and very predictable in the half-court set.
Suppose the Rockets don't meet any of the top 4 teams listed by Hollinger ahead of us(Thunder, Spurs, Nuggets, Clippers) in the first round. Say they meet the Warriors, Grizzlies, Lakers, or some other borderline playoff team instead. Do you truly believe the Rockets would lose against them in a 7 game series because we can't run on them?
Yes that's right. When the fast break isn't working we go to a pick and roll attack with Harden, Lin, Asik and the 3 point shooters on the wings. And our secondary option in the half court set is for Harden to shoot free throws.
Personally, I think the teams that will give the Rockets the most difficulty are the teams with superior speed. Teams like the Clippers, Denver, Golden State and OKC are the worst match ups as they have sufficient legs and speed up and down the floor to take away a significant portion of our transition offense. After that, teams with Elite shot blocking are problematic. Dwight or Ibaka would pose significant problems in terms of the dribble drive. This is where a strong stretch 4 who can post up occasionally would yield significant dividends. The Spurs are a tough match up but not the worst. What makes it hard is their offense is SO good that we can't really slow them down. Between Parker, Duncan, Manu and their bevy of 3 point shooters they won't really stop our offense, but they can outscore us. The depth of their bench creates real issues as our bench scoring can't touch them. To beat the Spurs we'd literally have to tire them out over the series. I could see us losing the first 2 or even 3 games, then fatigue settling in and it becoming a much closer contest. Probably not a win, but we could at least steal a couple games. As for teams we match up well against, those without high speed like Memphis, Minnesota, and Utah are very good match ups for us. The Lakers are a decent match up to a lesser degree because of Dwight's presence in the paint. We CAN get out of the first round but it will come down to match ups. Ideally, we would get Memphis in the first round, or we manage to pull off a 4th seed and take on one of the lower half seeds. Then hope that OKC and the Clippers get knocked out in one of the first two rounds. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that OKC and the Clippers both get knocked out in the first two rounds, so the most I can reasonably see for the team this year is a First round exit. Still, that would be pretty darn amazing for a roster this young and inexperienced. :grin:
I wouldn't put it in such absolute terms, but yes I think we won't run as much and teams will be more prepared for our half court offense, and that will make it much more difficult for us to win a series. Youth is another obvious factor.
I'm not seeing this. We run the weave in halfcourt moreso than a PnR. Where do y'all see us running the PnR so much vs the weave? It's completely different.
I know. There are several much easier formulas for ranking the teams in midseason...why do we even look at Hollinger's silly ranking, which is all over the map? Road Wins vs Home Losses is a vastly superior ranking. But it is so easy that Hollinger can dupe idiots into believing that more math is required. Dudes...Golden State has 11 road wins vs our 5. Doesn't look good. We are still ranked #10 in the West wrt Road Wins vs Home Losses. We are closer to a 10th seed in the West than a #6 seed (right now). We are definitely nowhere close to a #5 best in the entire NBA. lols
I really wish you wouldn't defend Hollinger's Power Rankings. No matter how you slice it, if I showed up with a formula that ranked the Rockets #5 right now, you would laugh at me. admit it. Road Wins vs Home Losses vs Hollinger's math. it's just silly.
His formula is really meant to rate how hot the teams currently are, rather than overall performance. But, yeah, its probably overly optimistic. The Rockets have had a tough schedule overall, but a few things jump out. We've had 5 more home games (12-6 at home). We've also played nearly half our games against the East (I think we've gone 13-2 in those games). Being young, we should expect a greater home-road disparity in our performance relative to other teams. I also think our fast pace works better against the East than the West, in general. So these are a couple factors which Hollinger's power rankings and the team ratings at B-R.com (which has us 7th currently) don't take into account. Here's a few different team rankings (the third is just a composite of the first two): Rd Wins, Hm Losses SOS-adjusted Ratings Composite Ratings --------------------------- ----------------------------------- -------------------- Rk Tm W L W-L% Rk Tm ORtg/A DRtg/A NRtg/A Rk Tm COMPOSITE --------------------------- ----------------------------------- -------------------- 1 DEN 8 1 0.889 1 LAC 111.28 100.33 +10.94 1 SAS +1.7 2 SAS 12 2 0.857 2 SAS 110.76 100.64 +10.12 2 LAC +1.6 3 NYK 9 2 0.818 3 OKC 114.11 104.15 +9.96 3 OKC +1.6 4 OKC 8 2 0.800 4 MEM 105.27 99.24 +6.03 4 NYK +1.2 5 MIA 7 2 0.778 5 NYK 112.21 106.84 +5.36 5 DEN +1.1 6 LAC 10 3 0.769 6 MIA 112.11 106.91 +5.21 6 MIA +1.1 7 GSW 11 4 0.733 7 HOU 109.25 105.27 +3.98 7 MEM +0.9 8 IND 8 3 0.727 8 DEN 109.13 105.98 +3.15 8 GSW +0.7 9 MEM 6 3 0.667 9 LAL 109.43 106.46 +2.97 9 IND +0.5 10 ATL 8 5 0.615 10 GSW 107.04 104.84 +2.2 10 ATL +0.4 11 UTA 6 4 0.600 11 ATL 105.94 104.17 +1.77 11 HOU +0.3 12 MIN 5 4 0.556 12 IND 101.63 101 +0.63 12 UTA +0.2 13 MIL 7 6 0.538 13 MIN 103.26 102.82 +0.44 13 LAL +0.2 14 BOS 5 5 0.500 14 CHI 102.54 102.18 +0.36 14 MIN +0.2 15 POR 4 4 0.500 15 UTA 107.51 107.59 -0.08 15 CHI -0.1 16 CHI 7 8 0.467 16 BRK 106.75 107.03 -0.28 16 MIL -0.1 17 HOU 5 6 0.455 17 MIL 102.59 103.94 -1.36 17 BRK -0.2 18 LAL 5 6 0.455 18 DET 105.02 107.19 -2.17 18 BOS -0.3 19 TOR 4 5 0.444 19 BOS 103.92 106.61 -2.69 19 POR -0.3 20 BRK 5 7 0.417 20 POR 104.82 107.55 -2.73 20 TOR -0.5 21 PHI 5 7 0.417 21 TOR 105.29 108.71 -3.42 21 PHI -0.5 22 DAL 4 6 0.400 22 PHI 103.1 106.55 -3.45 22 DAL -0.6 23 ORL 5 10 0.333 23 PHO 105.16 109.25 -4.09 23 DET -0.7 24 CLE 4 10 0.286 24 DAL 102.95 107.27 -4.32 24 ORL -0.8 25 DET 3 8 0.273 25 SAC 105.73 110.22 -4.49 25 PHO -1.0 26 NOH 4 12 0.250 26 ORL 100.92 105.43 -4.5 26 NOH -1.0 27 PHO 2 7 0.222 27 NOH 105.04 109.84 -4.81 27 CLE -1.1 28 CHA 3 12 0.200 28 CLE 103.53 109.96 -6.43 28 SAC -1.3 29 SAC 1 7 0.125 29 CHA 103.68 112.76 -9.08 29 CHA -1.5 30 WAS 1 11 0.083 30 WAS 95.62 104.97 -9.35 30 WAS -1.8
durvasa, I don't see how road wins vs. home losses % is a very good measurement of team performance. Specifically, if HOU has had only 13 chances to earn road wins while having 18 chances to get home losses, wouldn't they be at a significant disadvantage in terms of getting a higher road wins vs. home loesses percentage than a team that has had, for example, 18 chances to earn road wins and only 13 chances to get home losses? A better way to neutralize the effect of each team having more home or road games would be to take the average of home win% and road win %, no? Better yet, to really address scheduling factors (i.e. # of home vs. road games, # of games when you are playing 2nd game of b2b vs. when your opponent is playing 2nd game of b2b) is to calculate what each of these factors is worth in terms of average margin of victory/defeat to the average NBA team (I am sure Vegas has these numbers) and then apply the adjustment to each game. For example, let say being at home gives you an average advantage of +3.1 points and having rest vs. a team that played b2b gives you an advantage of 2.5 points, if the Rockets beat Utah by 6 points at the Toyota Center when the Rockets had rest but Utah did not, the "schedule adjusted" margin would be 6-3.1-2.5= +0.6. You can do this with each game to come up with what the Rockets hypothetical average margin of victory would be had scheduling not been a factor. As mentioned in another thread, Ed Kupfer, who works for the Rockets, calculated each team's "Strength of Schedule" ("SOS") that factors in opponent quality, home vs. away and rest vs. no rest. His graph for the SOS for the remainder of the 2012-13 season was already posted in that thread, here's is a different graph from him that shows the SOS for both the future and the past portion of the season: Unless I am reading it wrong, the graph suggests that, even accounting for the high # of home games, the Rockets have had one of the toughest schedules.
