PDA

View Full Version : Hollinger's Power Rankings



Guppyfighter
11-27-2012, 03:28 AM
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings

waveycrockett
11-27-2012, 03:31 AM
Nets have now beaten #2 and #3 on those rankings within a week

Ebbs
11-27-2012, 03:31 AM
Mavs are pretty far down.

Baller1
11-27-2012, 03:35 AM
The Thunder will probably shoot up to #1 after tonight. :laugh2:

kyubi256
11-27-2012, 03:37 AM
i think the Nets will move higher after today

More-Than-Most
11-27-2012, 03:46 AM
Sixers are very underrated... I get we are not legit contenders without Bynum but this is a smack in the face to the way this team and Jrue are playing.

TrueFan420
11-27-2012, 03:52 AM
How is Houston at 11

bholly
11-27-2012, 04:19 AM
Sixers are very underrated... I get we are not legit contenders without Bynum but this is a smack in the face to the way this team and Jrue are playing.

Mediocre record against a creampuff schedule. Hard to argue too much. It's just the way his rankings work.

JasonJohnHorn
11-27-2012, 08:06 AM
I know for power rankings they take more into consideration than just the record, but seriously? How is BK below LAL? And LAL so far ahead of Dallas when they have the same record?

Im_in_Mia_bish
11-27-2012, 01:26 PM
the grizz are playin so good right now.

Aleksandar
11-27-2012, 01:32 PM
Minnesota may be too high. We lost 3 in a row with relatively healthy squad..

JiffyMix88
11-27-2012, 01:47 PM
I'd say the Grizzles have the best chance to win a championship this year, they've got every aspect covered they can play their game and play the opposing teams game and beat them

mightybosstone
11-27-2012, 01:55 PM
How is Houston at 11

Strength of schedule and point differential. That's how Hollinger's rankings are based. They obviously take a record into account, but if a team is several games above .500, but has a negative point differential, it's pretty obvious they've gotten lucky and will fall off by the end of the season.

When you consider that New York is ranked second on his rankings and Houston beat them like a red-headed stepchild, it's no wonder Houston is ranked as highly as they are.

Pluvious
11-27-2012, 01:55 PM
I'd say the Grizzles have the best chance to win a championship this year, they've got every aspect covered they can play their game and play the opposing teams game and beat them

Almost no chance they win this year. Its still OKC, LAL, and San Antonio...just like when the season started. Memphis is a very solid team but really they can be slowed and stopped. Nothing scary about them. They are just really solid. The Clippers too.

Baller1
11-27-2012, 01:57 PM
OKC went from 6 to 3 with one win, haha.

Chronz
11-27-2012, 02:04 PM
I know for power rankings they take more into consideration than just the record, but seriously? How is BK below LAL? And LAL so far ahead of Dallas when they have the same record?
You answered your own question didnt you?

Chronz
11-27-2012, 02:04 PM
OKC went from 6 to 3 with one win, haha.

What an epic win

DoMeFavors
11-27-2012, 02:05 PM
Nets should be number 1 or 2

mightybosstone
11-27-2012, 02:08 PM
I know for power rankings they take more into consideration than just the record, but seriously? How is BK below LAL? And LAL so far ahead of Dallas when they have the same record?

Dude, it's really not that complicated to understand. It's just Hollinger's formula and has nothing to do with what Hollinger thinks of particular teams in terms of who is better or not. It puts more weight on strength of schedule and scoring differential than your typical power rankings would, which is why some teams' rankings might seem unusual. The Mavs have played a Charmin soft schedule, have a negative scoring margin and have been just bad in their last 10 games. I doubt that Hollinger thinks that Toronto is better than Dallas.

Six-8-TheWizard
11-27-2012, 02:09 PM
How the hell are my Raps ahead of Dallas :laugh:

JiffyMix88
11-27-2012, 02:33 PM
Almost no chance they win this year. Its still OKC, LAL, and San Antonio...just like when the season started. Memphis is a very solid team but really they can be slowed and stopped. Nothing scary about them. They are just really solid. The Clippers too.

Well I'm curious on the Lakers who the Grizzles can't account for? They have size, depth and are a very unselfish team. I think if this year is their first one where they stay healthy the whole season I can definitely see them knocking off any of the powerhouse teams.

JayW_1023
11-27-2012, 02:55 PM
Ridiculous how all these PR's are keeping LAL near the ten mark. Total bias.

The Lakers are a joke as of now, they don't deserve perks because they are the friggin Lakers.

Meanwhile the Celtics are right where they belong despite having a similar erratic season thus far.

Chronz
11-27-2012, 02:57 PM
Ridiculous how all these PR's are keeping LAL near the ten mark. Total bias.
Seriously man, your a basketball genius but sometimes its like you dont even read the thread

JayW_1023
11-27-2012, 03:02 PM
Seriously man, your a basketball genius

Untrue. Never was, but now I'm totally regressed to random, unreasonable posts. Have no time and energy to post elaborate stuff.

Probably should stop posting if I have nothing to add to the discussion. Yup.



but sometimes its like you dont even read the thread


I do...but sometimes I just want to find the most appropriate thread to spit out my current beef. Not proud of that either.

Chronz
11-27-2012, 03:23 PM
Untrue. Never was
Relative to PSD


I do...but sometimes I just want to find the most appropriate thread to spit out my current beef. Not proud of that either.
Hollingers PR arent my cup of tea but there is no bias involved. Vent as you wish, now is the time to do so because the Lakers are coming. You know its only a matter of time before they all get healthy

JayW_1023
11-27-2012, 03:26 PM
Relative to PSD


Hollingers PR arent my cup of tea but there is no bias involved. Vent as you wish, now is the time to do so because the Lakers are coming. You know its only a matter of time before they all get healthy

Sure they will. But that's a lame duck excuse to rank them higher than they should based on their current play.

Pluvious
11-27-2012, 03:27 PM
Well I'm curious on the Lakers who the Grizzles can't account for? They have size, depth and are a very unselfish team. I think if this year is their first one where they stay healthy the whole season I can definitely see them knocking off any of the powerhouse teams.

My feeling is that if Memphis gets hot at the right time and they have a good matchup they could certainly knock off a top team. They are very good afterall. But they really do not have either great individual players on offense OR a team defense that completely dominates another team. The closest thing they have is their perimeter defenders...which are very good.

The Lakers are not there yet. Maybe they will never be. But if they do get it together they should have outstanding pick and roll offense with Nash/Howard, interior scoring with their bigs, and a dominating individual player in Kobe. And a team with a veteran mentality of playing shut down defense during big games.

Its funny with the Lakers...you have seen a handful of dominating games where they have really just looked completely superior to their opponents. Then other games they just look terrible. Memphis on the otherhand is just really good in general but dominating? Z-Bo and Rudy Gay would just have to go into god mode during the playoffs if they want to win with their current roster.

gatkins11
11-27-2012, 04:36 PM
How the hell are my Raps ahead of Dallas :laugh:

Hollinger and his nonsensical formulas hate Dallas.

Chronz
11-27-2012, 05:04 PM
Sure they will. But that's a lame duck excuse to rank them higher than they should based on their current play.

But its soooo early in the season that how you define "current play" is entirely subjective. Win-Loss record says they are a .500 team, but SRS says they are a top-7 team. Which do you think Im more inclined to believe? This early, teams have faced entirely different competition under different circumstances (back to backs and such), that grading anyone by any sort of metric would be best accomplished with the most accurate barometer. Check out the stats forum but efficiency differentials are abit more important than regular season wins and losses.

Max.This
11-27-2012, 05:10 PM
the knicks arent number 2. Our team is one dimensional. We have one consistent scorer and a bunch of role players.

RonE Coleman
11-27-2012, 05:20 PM
Who really cares about Hollingers rankings? Hes a clueless bum, void of any basketball knowledge unless it comes through a formula of numbers.

Guppyfighter
11-27-2012, 05:21 PM
Who really cares about Hollingers rankings? Hes a clueless bum, void of any basketball knowledge unless it comes through a formula of numbers.

This is void of any knowledge itself.

RonE Coleman
11-27-2012, 05:30 PM
This is void of any knowledge itself.

Cool story bro.

todu82
11-27-2012, 05:41 PM
Bit of a surprise to see Charlotte so low on this list. Figured they'd be at least 10-12 spots higher.

Guppyfighter
11-27-2012, 05:42 PM
Bit of a surprise to see Charlotte so low on this list. Figured they'd be at least 10-12 spots higher.

Easiest schedule and a horrible margin of victory does that.

justinnum1
11-27-2012, 05:56 PM
its all about point differential and sos

ManRam
11-27-2012, 06:51 PM
What's the point of power rankings that only take record into consideration. Wouldn't those be called....standings?

dalton749
11-27-2012, 07:12 PM
What's the point of power rankings that only take record into consideration. Wouldn't those be called....standings?

its not only record toronto is 3-11 but theyre 23 because theyre much better than their record

Hawkeye15
11-27-2012, 07:37 PM
Who really cares about Hollingers rankings? Hes a clueless bum, void of any basketball knowledge unless it comes through a formula of numbers.

how so? He has the strongest preseason predictions of almost any expert, beats Vegas, and his statistical analysis has make strides in that area of understanding.

Hawkeye15
11-27-2012, 07:37 PM
its all about point differential and sos

which is a great sign of how strong a team is.

Mr. Baller
11-27-2012, 07:40 PM
Hollinger explains some things here

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/PERDiem-121127/hollinger-power-rankings

bholly
11-27-2012, 09:17 PM
its not only record toronto is 3-11 but theyre 23 because theyre much better than their record

that was his point - these aren't based on records, and they shouldn't be. he was disagreeing with some of the people criticizing them.

RonE Coleman
11-27-2012, 10:20 PM
"You are what your record says you are"

Guppyfighter
11-27-2012, 10:25 PM
"You are what your record says you are"

That's a cute saying. Too bad it's not predictive at all.

Hawkeye15
11-27-2012, 10:34 PM
"You are what your record says you are"

"you are as good a scorer as your points per game states."

Are you that archaic in regards to understanding numbers?

Guppyfighter
11-27-2012, 10:50 PM
Lakers: 7-7
Bobcats: 7-6

Bobcats are better. Ask RoneColeman

RonE Coleman
11-27-2012, 11:10 PM
Lakers: 7-7
Bobcats: 7-6

Bobcats are better. Ask RoneColeman

Cool story bro. That was almost funny, keep trying though.

Guppyfighter
11-27-2012, 11:13 PM
I don't what's worse. Using a sarcastic meme to insult someone. Or using it twice to insult someone. And then trying to tell the other person they aren't funny.

Let me let you in on a dirty little secret. It's not clever to use memes. You aren't clever. You aren't funny.

"Oh, I GET IT. It's the internet."

NickyNick
11-27-2012, 11:29 PM
I know the knicks are high on here, but i'd rather play them in a playoff series than the Griz, Heat, Thunder, Spurs or Lakers.

JayW_1023
11-28-2012, 06:40 AM
But its soooo early in the season that how you define "current play" is entirely subjective. Win-Loss record says they are a .500 team, but SRS says they are a top-7 team. Which do you think Im more inclined to believe? This early, teams have faced entirely different competition under different circumstances (back to backs and such), that grading anyone by any sort of metric would be best accomplished with the most accurate barometer. Check out the stats forum but efficiency differentials are abit more important than regular season wins and losses.

I partly disagree.

The only stat that matters in this case is W-L. But I do understand that Hollingers rankings shed more light on where they should be as opposed to where they are.

In the NBA you don't get any perks for being statistically good. (Well you do, but that should be in the Award section).

It doesn't matter how good statistically you are if you make the wrong play at the wrong time on the hardwood.

Hollingers rankings is just a mixed bag, it doesn't quantify everything.

Rockice_8
11-28-2012, 10:15 AM
Who really cares about Hollingers rankings? Hes a clueless bum, void of any basketball knowledge unless it comes through a formula of numbers.

Completely disagree here. Hollinger is one of the best, he leaves his personal feelings out of his rankings and uses only what the numbers tell him.

Just cause you don't agree doesn't make him wrong or clueless.

Chronz
11-28-2012, 01:06 PM
I partly disagree.

The only stat that matters in this case is W-L.
I dont see why it would. Teams have played against entirely different competition, if you want to look at a teams standings you can look at wins and losses but if you want an idea of the teams level of play (which is what Power Rankings are about) you need to dig much deeper than a less predictive/descriptive barometer.



But I do understand that Hollingers rankings shed more light on where they should be as opposed to where they are.
But they are posting these numbers in the present. The Lakers should be alot higher in the future.



In the NBA you don't get any perks for being statistically good. (Well you do, but that should be in the Award section).
Well think of power rankings as a team award. And the Lakers are being rewarded for their level of play.



It doesn't matter how good statistically you are if you make the wrong play at the wrong time on the hardwood.
For any single game maybe, tho alot of times luck is involved in close games as much as execution, its why these stats were invented in the first place. But for the purposes of a POWER RANKING, why not put more stock into the more important barometer? If all you want to know is how many wins and losses a certain team has then check the standings, if you want to know how well a team is playing you should check the efficiency with which it plays.



Hollingers rankings is just a mixed bag, it doesn't quantify everything.
There are plenty of other systems that feel the Lakers have done pretty well. And it may not quantify everything but the point remains it tells us more than simply looking at the standings.