A interesting rank by UStoday take into factors like schedule, rank of the opponents and home/Away http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nba0607.htm Spurs, Maverics and Rox are top 3 teams in this rank
So the rockets get respect when they look at pure stats and don't ask basketball "experts" their perceived opinions. What else is new? I love how 8 of top 10 teams are in the west though. So much for the power balance we were suppose to have with Lebron, Wade, Howard, and Okafor.
Good scientific stats never lie. I think this rank tells the true power of the NBA teams as of now. Most expert tend to be biased.
Funny how much everyone hates the BCS, (including me, as a Moutain West Conference alum) and yet when it makes the Rockets look good, computers aren't "biased" and never lie. Just a random observation.
vs. top 10 1-4, vs. top 16: 3-5. That's what really matters if the goal is championship or deep into playoffs.
Sorry, I'm normally a lurker, but I'm working on a masters in a statistics-related field and I have to say something here. He said "good" scientific stats never lie. That is true. The BCS can hardly be considered a good set of scientific stats. A) Their sample size is tiny and the inter-conference matchups are very limited so it's very hard to accurately compare teams between conferences and B) if they were accurately predicting the strength of the teams, they wouldn't all disagree every week. Sorry, just had to get that off my chest. BCS... %&$^ It is most certainly possible mathematically gage teams' performance but with any set of statistics, there is going to be uncertainty. I'm not familiar with the methods this guy is using but I'd say the order of the teams is pretty accurate. I think the Rockets are among the top teams right now but it has been clear from watching the games that there is a lot of room for improvement (as our 1-4 record against the other top teams shows). The defense has been fantastic and the offense has shown shades of the team from two years ago. They're coming along nicely and when they start to get on a roll... look out.
I think the stat says Rox and Suns are tied for the fourth, and we only lead the sixth which is Utah by 0.12 .
Stats can lie, but I like the way you qualify with 'good' and 'scientific' ... although now that we've thrown subjective qualifiers in there...
By your logic, how is the sample size 15 games into the season large enough by any standards? Also, the inter-conference matchups are still a factor in the NBA. Each team only plays a team from the other conference twice. I'm not saying that the BCS isn't awful or that this system is flawed, either. It was just an observation that I still find valid.
Actually, we are, in spite of those numbers. We've played well on the road overall, and we have been absolutely dominant at home especially on the defensive end of the ball (I believe we're holding opponents under 40% shooting in Toyota Center) on the way to a 7-1 home record. Our point differential is one of the best in the league. I think we're ranked exactly where we should be right now.
While 15 games still has a lot of uncertainty in the NBA, the Rockets have already played about half the teams in the NBA and they probably have a common opponent with every team in the NBA. A full season of college football has a team play about 12 games, but there are about 120 teams. Uncertainity in stats goes way up since there is a small sample size versus the large numbers of teams in a full season. Stats never lie. People just misinterpret them or misrepresent them. For instance, Carr could have a 70% completion percentage . QB X could have a completion percentage of 65%. A person could say Carr is a more accurate passer than QB X when the information presented only shows Carr has a higher completion presentage.
At this stage, with the amount of time these players have spent together, I think it's more important to beat the teams you should beat and build on team unity and cohesiveness. And remember, of those five losses, 4 came on the road, 2 were the second of back-toback games, and none were absolute blow-outs.
Oh, you're absolutely right. 15 games is still a small sample. But Joe Joe is dead on. We've played nearly half the teams in the league (NY and MEM the only ones we've played twice) so we have direct comparisons with them and lots one-degree-of-separation comparisons with the rest. It's a far sight better than trying to compare say, Florida and Michigan with only one common opponent. Your sig. is the best summation: There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. There is always error which is why I'd like to know exactly how this ranking was calculated. But just off the top of my head, I'd say he's doing something right. (And don't even get me started on the quarterback debate, Joe Joe!)
No, what matters is that the team grows together and gets a high seed and at the end of the year we are a monster. DD
