A couple of observations for what it's worth: 1. There are two periods in the graph that show what the season should be like had the Rockets played consistently smarter basketball...the "what the Rockets are capable of" graph line,if you will. From Nov 1 to Nov 24 and from Feb 2 to present day. It's a 2 steps forward and 1 back mentality that we can only hope is here to stay for the rest of the season. 2. There are also two periods that reflect the frustrating "throw stuff at my TV" thick headed nature of the Rockets. On Dec 9 they were 6 games over .500 and couldn't get to 7(ONE STINKIN' GAME)until Jan 17...39 DAYS LATER!!! Then they made it to 9 over just 8 days later, but didn't get to 10 until Feb 27...33 days later. The graph clearly points out what everyone here and in the media has been saying about the Rockets. They're clearly a Jeckyll and Hyde team. They tease us with their marvelous physical ability to do great things and crush us with their inability to use their heads consistently. There's a line from Eddie Murphy's "The Golden Child" that fits the Rockets perfectly. The monk says something like, "Those magnificent Americans. All that power and not a clue what to do with it." I'm sure the quote is not exact, but the message sure fits the Rockets, doesn't it?
Strong work. I'd be interested to see an East vs. West plot of points. I bet it wouldn't be as 'promising'...although, we do seem to be on an upswing.
Nice Charts Tango! The obvous trends I see in that the Rockets and Griz are continuing to build above 500 while the Nuggets are fading. The conclusions are that the Griz and Rox will go into the play-offs 6 and 7 respectively while Denver may very well fade from the play-off picture. Utah is just a game back and has gone 6-4 over the last 10 games while Denver has gone 2-8. If that continues for another week or two, Utah or Portland will be playing the Kings in the first round.
ummm... you are totally discounting the effect of Hubie the Undead's coaching... Posey is doing good...no question. but to imply that he is the sole reason for the Grizz playing like they are is as reaching as your 4th place prediction earlier in the season.
its called curve fitting and it requires calculus. THIS THREAD RULES!!!!!!!!!!!! look at that growth!!! rockets are SOOO going to end strong with 50 wins. just look at the growth chart. every week they are consistently a better team. thats the facts folks. thanks for the graphic!!
No. It really, really doesn't. The model outlines a more rapid learning curve for Memphis. It doesn't give reasons. It doesn't directly support your theory. Memphis has had great turnover in personnel and this is their 2nd year under a new coach. There are many reasons for improvement Arguing that the entire difference is a direct result over Posey's superiority over Jim Jackson is... difficult... I think. Moreover, Posey's frequent ineffectiveness on the Rockets would seem to indicate that perhaps he benefits more from a different system with different personnel. I know you like Posey. He's doing well. Be happy - but don't say that data means something it doesn't.
It is very difficult to see growth on a game-by-game basis if you are a fan. It is also tough to remember that this is a tough league with a LOT of ups and downs for the vast majority of teams. Thanks for reminding us.
The graph shows me that the Grizzlies are constantly, steadily improving, the Rockets have flat-lined as far as improvement goes in the new year, and that the Nuggets are in a tailspin. For those of us Rockets fans that are looking for something bigger than making the playoffs and making a first round exit, you would hope that the line would begin to curve upwards over the course of the next year. There is some error in the graphs though since schedule strength varies over the course of a season.
Haven, nowhere did I suggest it was JJ for Posey. Your recollection should show that both guys could have been on the team. My scenario involves both players being on the team. Forget the thought about different system. Posey's play today should be no surprise to anyone who saw him play for the rockets. When he left the rockets he was a better player than when he got here and there is nothing he is doing today that could not have been anticipated. It is not an accident that Brown and West took him. It not about me liking Posey. It is about shooting yourself in the foot. Folks were happy to bring up many times how bad the Cato contract was but would like to sweep under the carpet how erroneous it was to let Posey go. R2K, bball is a team sport so it is a given that contributions come from all over. I am just saying that Posey's on our team would have made us even better and may have hurt Memphis. Certainly his contribution and role is a fact just like Pike is a fact.
I will agree that taking Posey off of the Griz and onto us would make a difference inbetween both teams records. But I am not sure how many games it would change. And I am still not sure Jackson would come here if Posey was here. I dont know. It is all water under the bridge anyway. I agree that I would like to see us lengthen our rotation but I dont think we have the depth to do it like Memphis does. Or perhaps the more precise answer is that we don't have the depth that JVG feels comfortable with. Nachbar and Pike could be decent bench guys but JVG just doesn't have enough faith in them in terms of how they play on the current incarnation of the team.
what is your fascination with posey??? you say we shouldn't assume that the system posey is in makes him more productive in memphis, but then you go and assume that had he stayed on the rox, he'd be playing just as well as he is now. your logic is completely flawed. you base your assesstments on nothing more than pure speculation, so don't go acting like you know something that we dont.
Tango, I don't want to get this thread moved, but maybe you could send your resume to the feds for a little economic modeling work.
im with you easy. a steady line with the same slope, whether rising, falling, or horizontal indicates the team is maintaining its level or play. while i sloping line, either upwards(memphis) or downwards(denver) indicates improvment or digression. an example would be: say a very good team play .700 ball, from the beginning of the season to the end. the dont IMPROVE at all, they have maintained their level of play, and on the graph it would show a steady rising line, no curve. and the slope would be .7. on the other hand u have a team like the grizz, who are improving. they start play playing .500 ball, then .600, then .700(lately. THATS improvment. and then ofcourse theres the nuggets, playing .600 ball, then .500, now something like .200. digression. but then again this is purely RECORDWISE, mathematically, we have been rather consistant, playing ~.600 ball. HOWEVER, there are many intangibles not shown in the graph. the most glaring being it does not show strenghth of schedule. example: a team has a very rough schedule in the beginning of the season, and plays .400 ball, then end the season playing .700 ball while beating up scrub teams. the graph would show and up curve, indicating improvment to the casual observer, but we know otherwise. ALSO, the other major intangible i see is the level of play. what i mean by this is we may have beaten some teams and lost some in the beginning playing subpar, and now recently, we have again beaten some and loss some, BUT have gained chemistry with teammates, run fluid plays istead of ISO etc. (im not talking about us, just an example). That WOULD be improvment, even though the record, and the graph may not show it. but in anycase good observation easy
Nice graph, thanks. What it really points out to me is our lack of a nice, long winning streak. Come on, Rockets! Let's string a few together heading into the playoffs!
Nah, a flat line would indicate no improvement. The graph is for games OVER .500. So if we win one, lose one, win one, lose one ... it's be a steady, straight line (i.e., we remain 5 games over .500). If it steadily curves up (win 2, lose 1, win 3, lose 2) it shows growth in winning percentage (going from 5 games over .500 to 10 games over).
well done, Tango. Judging from the graph, Grizzlies seems more inconsistent than us. After 7 straight loses, they got striking 8 wins in a row. Amazing!
or, I know that. What I was asking is why a quadratic form was used for regression. What is the logic/model for using quadratic form? Why not use a different form that yields higher R-square? Without logic, this is a mere undergraduate practise.
