...given that the rockets diff is now +2.5 does that mean that they're on track for roughly 45 wins? :grin:
i dont buy this point differntial doesn't mean ****. teams like the heat and thunder take many nights off..they dont start playing for real till the 4th quarter and only win by few points
Stats can only tell you so much but of course if it's high, you have a good chance at beating teams because you're offense and defense are solid that both can win you games.
So if the season ended today, 50% OKC is winning it this year with +8.4, with Spurs not far behind with +8.1. Curious, were the Heat tops last year in PD?
JESUS H. CHRIST. WTF is going on with sports today? Gone are the days of just watching sports and just analyzing what you see.
And yet the Thunder and Heat are 2nd and 4th in point differential, respectively. Same as their ranking according to winning percentage.
No. Bulls were #1, Spurs #2, Thunder #3, Heat #4. http://espn.go.com/nba/standings/_/year/2012 I do think there's something to certain teams not playing as hard or taking off games every now and then whereas other teams will always play at their near best. PD is a good indicator of strength, but it would be foolish to ignore the eye test. Spoelstra won't use some of the Heat's most effective plays during the regular season. He didn't last year and I haven't seen him to so this year. In the last three years the Celtics post-season winning% has been better than during the regular season. That's no fluke. Deeper teams without true elite players likely won't do quite as well either, see DEN, CHI, SAS.
You can't go by the numbers you posted because those point differentials are on a per game basis, whereas the original article uses point differential per 100 possessions, which accounts for game pace. Those numbers can be found here: http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats. I took the liberty of calculating the point differentials per 100 possessions, as well as the projected wins/losses according to the formula from the article: HTML: RK TEAM PF100 PA100 PD100 W L 1 Oklahoma City 109.9 100.2 +9.7 64.8 17.2 2 San Antonio 106.9 98.4 +8.5 61.9 20.1 3 LA Clippers 107.0 98.8 +8.2 61.1 20.9 4 Miami 109.0 101.5 +7.5 59.4 22.6 5 New York 108.1 103.0 +5.1 53.5 28.5 6 Memphis 100.4 97.1 +3.3 49.1 32.9 7 Denver 105.5 102.4 +3.1 48.6 33.4 8 Chicago 100.2 97.5 +2.7 47.6 34.4 9 Golden State 104.3 101.9 +2.4 46.9 35.1 10 LA Lakers 105.9 103.6 +2.3 46.6 35.4 11 Indiana 98.7 96.5 +2.2 46.4 35.6 12 Houston 105.2 103.5 +1.7 45.1 36.9 13 Brooklyn 104.6 103.4 +1.2 43.9 38.1 14 Atlanta 102.1 101.0 +1.1 43.7 38.3 15 Milwaukee 100.5 100.3 +0.2 41.5 40.5 16 Boston 99.6 100.3 -0.7 39.2 42.8 17 Toronto 104.0 105.6 -1.6 37.0 45.0 18 Utah 103.3 104.9 -1.6 37.0 45.0 19 Portland 102.0 104.0 -2.0 36.0 46.0 20 Detroit 101.2 103.5 -2.3 35.3 46.7 21 Dallas 101.8 104.3 -2.5 34.8 47.2 22 Minnesota 99.7 102.4 -2.7 34.3 47.7 23 Philadelphia 99.9 103.3 -3.4 32.6 49.4 24 Orlando 100.7 104.7 -4.0 31.1 50.9 25 New Orleans 102.0 106.2 -4.2 30.6 51.4 26 Phoenix 99.7 104.8 -5.1 28.4 53.6 27 Washington 95.2 100.6 -5.4 27.7 54.3 28 Cleveland 99.3 106.6 -7.3 23.0 59.0 29 Sacramento 100.9 108.2 -7.3 23.0 59.0 30 Charlotte 98.9 108.1 -9.2 18.3 63.7
Huh? Toney Parker, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobli? Maybe Manu isnt', but if Toney Parker and Tim Duncan aren't Elite players I would be curious to know what you consider "true elite" players...
Point differential is not a particularly useful stat (other than to see if a team is winning over/under what they should within a small sample) Point differential is an outcome, an output you are hoping to achieve. What you want to know are the inputs that result in a high point differential.
Oops, I just realized that you guys were talking about the 2011-12 season. Here are the point differentials per 100 possessions for that season, as well as the projected wins based on the formula from OP (adjusted to a 66-game season) and the actual wins: HTML: RK TEAM PF100 PA100 PD100 PROJECTED WINS ACTUAL WINS 1 Chicago 104.5 95.3 +9.2 51.2 50 2 San Antonio 108.5 100.6 +7.9 48.6 50 3 Miami 104.3 97.1 +7.2 47.2 46 4 Oklahoma City 107.1 100.0 +7.1 47.0 47 5 Philadelphia 101.7 96.6 +5.1 43.1 35 6 Atlanta 102.4 98.6 +3.8 40.5 40 7 Boston 98.9 95.5 +3.4 39.7 39 8 Indiana 103.5 100.4 +3.1 39.1 42 9 Denver 106.5 103.4 +3.1 39.1 38 10 New York 101.4 98.4 +3.0 38.9 36 11 LA Clippers 105.2 102.9 +2.3 37.5 40 12 Memphis 101.0 98.9 +2.1 37.1 41 13 LA Lakers 103.3 101.7 +1.6 36.1 41 14 Dallas 101.0 99.7 +1.3 35.5 36 15 Orlando 102.4 101.7 +0.7 34.4 37 16 Houston 102.8 102.1 +0.7 34.4 34 17 Utah 103.7 103.6 +0.1 33.2 36 18 Milwaukee 102.4 102.4 0.0 33.0 31 19 Phoenix 103.5 103.8 -0.3 32.4 33 20 Portland 102.8 103.7 -0.9 31.2 28 21 Minnesota 101.5 103.6 -2.1 28.8 26 22 Golden State 103.1 106.0 -2.9 27.2 23 23 Toronto 98.5 101.5 -3.0 27.0 23 24 New Orleans 98.3 102.3 -4.0 25.0 21 25 Sacramento 101.0 106.8 -5.8 21.5 22 26 Washington 97.8 103.8 -6.0 21.1 20 27 Detroit 97.8 104.0 -6.2 20.7 25 28 New Jersey 99.7 106.9 -7.2 18.7 22 29 Cleveland 98.1 106.0 -7.9 17.3 21 30 Charlotte 92.3 107.8 -15.5 2.3 7
This is the SECOND simplest and most accurate stat to measure playoff seeding. The #1 stat throughout the regular season is Road Wins vs Home Losses -- not as a %, but as a +/- (note, W/Ls is also a +/- stat).
Thanks lightningbolt, I just assumed the article was about "normal" PD, as I was unaware of adjusted PD. Well, Parker is having a career year and Duncan is playing better than he has in years himself. These guys just weren't elite these past year. Manu is and has been a stud, but he can only play so many minutes and as good as Parker and Duncan have been this season I question whether they'll be able to play as well in the playoffs. The true elite according to myself currently consists of LeBron, Durant and Chris Paul. Howard was arguably in that group when he was healthy. Guys like Rose, Harden, Kobe, Wade, Westbrook & Melo are close, but probably a tier below. Then you have guys Love, LMA, Bosh, etc... and that's probably where I'd put the big three of the Spurs. Those guys are still really good, but there's a significant difference between the best of the best and those guys, as they can't carry their team for long stretches.
When dealing with a small sample of games -- say, less than 25 -- point differential will give you a better overall view of how good/bad the team is than win-loss record. That is, point differential will give you better projections for the percentage of games the team will win the rest of the way than win-loss record on average. However, the more games the team plays, the less benefit point differential provides as a predictive tool over win-loss record. After 50 games or so, its probably negligible.
Since this saga started that is the craziest interview he's given IMO or I should say the craziest he has sounded anyway.
?? That's what Pt Differential says, too. Pt Diff has them as 4th best team in the league. So, not sure what you point is. Do you know that +/- RW v HLs mathematically converges on actual playoff seeds, while Pt Diff does not. Yes, I know they are the defending champs, and best team in the league. But, currently, each stat has them 4th or 5th in the league. Miami better get their **** together, because a .500 road record won't get you home court in the Finals. And they likely will. Notice they have played the least amount of games against the East than any other Eastern team.
