PDA

View Full Version : Rockets and Warriors are third and fourth in Hollinger's rankings



Guppyfighter
03-20-2014, 04:54 PM
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings

Htownballa1622
03-20-2014, 04:57 PM
Heat and Thunder are still ahead of Rox and Warriors imo.

So 5/6 would be more realistic.

valade16
03-20-2014, 05:03 PM
I find it insane that the Blazers are 7th on his rankings... which puts them at 6th in the Western Conference.

Just nasty deep.

tr3ymill3r
03-20-2014, 05:06 PM
Rockets VS Warriors fans in 3...2...1...FIGHT!!!

JEDean89
03-20-2014, 05:32 PM
hollinger puts recent play and margin way over record. in fact his whole system is designed to make actual records meaningless.

Hawkeye15
03-20-2014, 05:34 PM
hollinger puts recent play and margin way over record. in fact his whole system is designed to make actual records meaningless.

pretty much. I mean, my Wolves have been top 10 all year basically, despite never being in the playoff picture.

valade16
03-20-2014, 05:38 PM
hollinger puts recent play and margin way over record. in fact his whole system is designed to make actual records meaningless.

I don't see how Portland can still be 7th, we've played like poop the last 10-15 games.

Hawkeye15
03-20-2014, 05:40 PM
I don't see how Portland can still be 7th, we've played like poop the last 10-15 games.

yeah, but he factors in SOS over recent play, and you still have a +4.5 margin the last 10. You ran into a really tough stretch of teams, the equation factors that in.

Hollinger's system isn't perfect, but its a whole lot stronger than most I have come across on major sports sites.

Bruno
03-20-2014, 05:42 PM
how many times has hollingers #1 ranked team won the championship?

valade16
03-20-2014, 06:16 PM
yeah, but he factors in SOS over recent play, and you still have a +4.5 margin the last 10. You ran into a really tough stretch of teams, the equation factors that in.

Hollinger's system isn't perfect, but its a whole lot stronger than most I have come across on major sports sites.

Yeah, we have played an insanely hard schedule the last 10 or so games, but what kills me is they were on top or in position to win in virtually all the games and just **** the bed and let the other team win.

They lost to the Pacers, SA, Thunder, LAC, Lakers, Mavs, Rockets, and GSW by a combined 27 points. That's 3.4 points per.

I guess that's why we haven't been penalized by his system but man, that is a terrible omen going into the playoffs...

Clippersfan86
03-20-2014, 08:06 PM
Clippers still running ****. JJ Redick and Jamal Crawford both went through practice with the team today.

SugeKnight
03-20-2014, 08:12 PM
Clippers still running ****. JJ Redick and Jamal Crawford both went through practice with the team today.

Clippers are scary. The Warriors and the Rockets rather play each other than the Clips. I still like our chances tho

NBA_Starter
03-20-2014, 09:17 PM
They are on a collision course for a playoff matchup.

Hawkeye15
03-20-2014, 09:50 PM
Yeah, we have played an insanely hard schedule the last 10 or so games, but what kills me is they were on top or in position to win in virtually all the games and just **** the bed and let the other team win.

They lost to the Pacers, SA, Thunder, LAC, Lakers, Mavs, Rockets, and GSW by a combined 27 points. That's 3.4 points per.

I guess that's why we haven't been penalized by his system but man, that is a terrible omen going into the playoffs...

when you guys started out so hot early in the season, I remember I brought up this stretch specifically.

Look, Portland is the most well balanced team in the league possibly. They have more players with 5 win shares than any other team easily. You have no weak link as a starter, and no elite as a starter. Bench is solid. Its why LMA has been overrated this year, as was Lillard. There just isn't a noticeable weak link. But, it will be up to Stotts come playoff time to steer them into the 04' Pistons type run, because that was a similar team in that nobody on their roster was a superstar, but every starter was an above average starter to very good player.

My money is that Portland loses round 1 to Houston, but we shall see.

slaker619
03-20-2014, 09:51 PM
They put in work !

Clippersfan86
03-21-2014, 12:11 AM
Clippers are scary. The Warriors and the Rockets rather play each other than the Clips. I still like our chances tho

What's scary is we've only had our starting 5 healthy for 16 games. Granger has been outstanding... so you add him into the mix and it's nuts. Warriors haven't seen anything close to a healthy Clips squad besides the home opener we won. Rockets we are 3-0 against by an average of 13 ppg, so again although Dubs/Rockets are dangerous, I'm not too worried. Spurs are the only team I want the Clips avoid at all costs. In the west it's all matchups.

P&GRealist
03-21-2014, 12:14 AM
And neither is gonna make the finals.
It's OKC or SAS going to the finals.

torocan
03-21-2014, 12:14 AM
Spurs are the only team I want the Clips avoid at all costs. In the west it's all matchups.

The West is crazy.

The Clippers want the Rockets. The Rockets want the Spurs. Everyone wants Portland. Nobody wants Memphis.

The wild, wild west...

P&GRealist
03-21-2014, 12:17 AM
Or the Clippers

P&GRealist
03-21-2014, 12:18 AM
The West is crazy.

The Clippers want the Rockets. The Rockets want the Spurs. Everyone wants Portland. Nobody wants Memphis.

The wild, wild west...
This basically defines the West.

ThaDubs
03-21-2014, 12:33 AM
I'm not even gonna lie, getting out of the first round for us would be hard as **** this year

mightybosstone
03-21-2014, 01:06 AM
Am I the only one who's wondering why the **** this is thread worthy? It seems like this thread was created just to instigate more arguments between Rockets and Warriors fans. Let's leave it for the playoffs, fellas. This isn't a debate worth having until then.

nastynice
03-21-2014, 01:14 AM
The West is crazy.

The Clippers want the Rockets. The Rockets want the Spurs. Everyone wants Portland. Nobody wants Memphis.

The wild, wild west...

lol, for real. Portland aint no joke tho

these western conference playoffs been brewing for a minute, n **** is just getting hotter the closer it gets

Clippersfan86
03-21-2014, 02:27 AM
Portland doesn't put fear in anybody, including Memphis and Phoenix. I doubt they survive more physical, slower playoff style.

Hawkeye15
03-21-2014, 02:35 AM
Portland doesn't put fear in anybody, including Memphis and Phoenix. I doubt they survive more physical, slower playoff style.

I have thought Portland was overrated all year. I think they are a first round knockout, but anything can happen.

torocan
03-21-2014, 09:25 AM
Portland doesn't put fear in anybody, including Memphis and Phoenix. I doubt they survive more physical, slower playoff style.

Think about it. The perceived "easy" path in the West is a first round run through a team that's currently the 5th seed in the West and has the 7th best win/loss record in the NBA at 45-24 (.652)....

That's just F'd up. :ouch:

LongIslandIcedZ
03-21-2014, 09:38 AM
Isnt Hollinger employed by Memphis or something?

Didn't realize he was still allowed to write for ESPN

torocan
03-21-2014, 10:00 AM
Isnt Hollinger employed by Memphis or something?

Didn't realize he was still allowed to write for ESPN

The Hollinger rankings are generated by a computer algorithm. My understanding is that the Hollinger power rankings product is proprietary to ESPN, and currently controlled by ESPN.

So yes, Hollinger's name is on it, however a monkey with a keyboard is basically punching the data in and a computer is spitting out the results.

D-Leethal
03-21-2014, 12:33 PM
You shouldn't need a math formula to tell you who the best teams in the league are.

waveycrockett
03-21-2014, 12:47 PM
How can Hollinger weigh in recent play more heavily than overall record but have the team with the best record since Jan 1st and 8-2 in last 10 games ranked 16th? Nets get no respect lol

waveycrockett
03-21-2014, 12:49 PM
I have thought Portland was overrated all year. I think they are a first round knockout, but anything can happen.

Aldridge and Lopez are going to have to play the best basketball of their career to survive. I think they are 1 and done also.

Chronz
03-21-2014, 12:50 PM
You shouldn't need a math formula to tell you who the best teams in the league are.
Whats wrong with this forumula now? And what should we use?

Chronz
03-21-2014, 12:53 PM
How can Hollinger weigh in recent play more heavily than overall record but have the team with the best record since Jan 1st and 8-2 in last 10 games ranked 16th? Nets get no respect lol

Point differential and strength of schedule play a role here as well tho. In the regular season, Champion caliber teams are generally defined by their ability to dominate inferior opponents, not to scrape by.

I say this having no idea how the Nets have played but it has nothing to do with respect and everything to do with statistical facts.

torocan
03-21-2014, 01:00 PM
How can Hollinger weigh in recent play more heavily than overall record but have the team with the best record since Jan 1st and 8-2 in last 10 games ranked 16th? Nets get no respect lol

Point differential + Strength of Schedule.

In Hollinger's formula, if you play powder puffs, you get less credit. If you play a lot of home games, you get less credit. If you don't play a lot of back to backs, you get less credit. If you win games by a small margin, you get less credit. If you lose games by a small margin, you get penalized less than being blown out.

The idea is that you're going to win more against weaker teams, so beating stronger teams moves you up more. And if you're a *GOOD* team you won't have a ton of close games (which are basically crap shoots and come down to final possessions). When you play bad teams you should blow them out, and when you play good teams you shouldn't get blown out often.

The Nets had an easier than average schedule over their last 25% (.490). According to Hollinger's the Nets had the 19th hardest schedule in the NBA in the last 25% of their games, or 11th easiest schedule out of 30 teams.

The Nets also had a small point differential over those last 25% (+2.47 points). That's the 11th best point differential IN SPITE of having a significantly easier schedule than the teams above them. In other words, on average the games the Nets play are 1 possession games (essentially a fair amount of luck).

Compare this to the Clippers... .532 schedule over the last 25% of their games. That's the 6th hardest schedule in the NBA. Their point differential over the last 25% of their games is 11.22 points. That's good enough for the #1 point differential in the NBA, in SPITE of having the 6th hardest schedule. Think about that, 11.22 points.. they're blowing out their opponents by 4 possessions on AVERAGE.

Hollinger's doesn't just look at win/loss. It looks at WHO you play, WHEN you play them, and HOW you play them. And it weighs recent performance more heavily than total season performance as teams evolve over the season. Players get injured, they get healthy, they find chemistry, or they fall apart over a season.

You may not agree with it, but I think it makes sense considering how Hollinger's weighs team records.

FOBolous
03-21-2014, 01:08 PM
What's scary is we've only had our starting 5 healthy for 16 games. Granger has been outstanding... so you add him into the mix and it's nuts. Warriors haven't seen anything close to a healthy Clips squad besides the home opener we won. Rockets we are 3-0 against by an average of 13 ppg, so again although Dubs/Rockets are dangerous, I'm not too worried. Spurs are the only team I want the Clips avoid at all costs. In the west it's all matchups.

#FullSquad :laugh2:

valade16
03-21-2014, 01:16 PM
Aldridge and Lopez are going to have to play the best basketball of their career to survive. I think they are 1 and done also.


I have thought Portland was overrated all year. I think they are a first round knockout, but anything can happen.


Portland doesn't put fear in anybody, including Memphis and Phoenix. I doubt they survive more physical, slower playoff style.

I understand this reasoning but at the same time; be careful what you wish for.

waveycrockett
03-21-2014, 01:25 PM
Point differential and strength of schedule play a role here as well tho. In the regular season, Champion caliber teams are generally defined by their ability to dominate inferior opponents, not to scrape by.

I say this having no idea how the Nets have played but it has nothing to do with respect and everything to do with statistical facts.
Nah Im sort just kidding. I understand it's pure math and no bias but I just think it's a little confusing

lol, please
03-21-2014, 01:30 PM
Am I the only one who's wondering why the **** this is thread worthy? It seems like this thread was created just to instigate more arguments between Rockets and Warriors fans. Let's leave it for the playoffs, fellas. This isn't a debate worth having until then.

The debate will end when Rockets fans admit the teams are equal at a bare mimimum, since asking them to accept that the Warriors are better is understandably unbearable.

lol, please
03-21-2014, 01:31 PM
#FullSquad #ZeroExcuses

Iggy is injured. :whistle:

FOBolous
03-21-2014, 02:00 PM
The debate will end when Rockets fans admit the teams are equal at a bare mimimum, since asking them to accept that the Warriors are better is understandably unbearable.

why are warriors fans so insecure? why do they try so hard to gain the acceptance of other fans? your team is the 6th best in the West...get over it.

torocan
03-21-2014, 02:03 PM
The debate will end when Rockets fans admit the teams are equal at a bare mimimum, since asking them to accept that the Warriors are better is understandably unbearable.

I doubt that will be settled any time soon unless they meet in the play offs.

Of course, GSW would need to get out of the 6th seed for that to happen... I guess the ball is in GSW's court. (Yes, I said it.... )

lol, please
03-21-2014, 02:09 PM
Warriors fans and the team itself is confident they can win a 7 game series against anyone, anywhere. I think we all want to see it happen.

Hawkeye15
03-21-2014, 02:09 PM
I understand this reasoning but at the same time; be careful what you wish for.

oh I don't wish for it haha, I just think that is the likely outcome. That being said, they are paired up with the Rox right now. Either team could advance or get knocked out. The west is really strong this year, I just think Portland is ripe for the picking is all. Shoot, they have the #1 offense in the league. I do think their defense leaves something to be desired, but they can score with anyone, which will give them a chance.

FOBolous
03-21-2014, 02:17 PM
Warriors fans and the team itself is confident they can win a 7 game series against anyone, anywhere. I think we all want to see it happen.

yea we know. you made it clear. you think if you have your #FullSquad (i.e. the guy that averages 9ppg whom you think can lock down Lebron and Durant themselves), you're better than the Clippers, OKC, San Antonio, Miami, and Indiana. As for the other teams, they're just stepping stones.

lol, please
03-21-2014, 03:34 PM
All the teams you listed are better on paper but games are played on the court, and of all the teams listed I like our chances best against MIA. Of those teams I would fear OKC the most, but when fully healthy we can beat any of those teams in a series, though we shouldn't be favored with the bookies either.

But that has nothing to do with how the warriors match up so well with the Rockets.

Hawkeye15
03-21-2014, 04:01 PM
Rockets have had 39 missed games by their starters. There backup center position has missed 90 games. Lin missed 10 games. Dontas 9 games. Garcia 8 games.

Warriors starters have missed 32 games. Barnes missed 4. Speights 3.

Why do so many Warriors fans bring up "if healthy" in all of these conversations? The Rockets, "if healthy" all year, would have another 4-5 wins probably. So?

Fact is, by all statistical measures, these teams are relatively even. The Warriors defense is better, the Rockets offense better. Both have around the same SRS, and expected W/L. Both have around the same win margin, and the only real benefit the Rockets have, if they meet, is HCA.

Goose17
03-21-2014, 04:18 PM
Rockets have had 39 missed games by their starters. There backup center position has missed 90 games. Lin missed 10 games. Dontas 9 games. Garcia 8 games.

Warriors starters have missed 32 games. Barnes missed 4. Speights 3.


You would have to take into account the impact each individual has, one starter doesn't have the same impact as the other. I would gladly argue that losing Dre for 12 games has the same impact defensively as losing Dwight. When Dre was healthy we were 3rd/4th in defensive efficiency. When he was sitting out, we were 7th/8th. That's a very significant drop.

At one point we literally didn't have any backup PFs or Cs, our bench was decimated.

Pretty sure our back up center (Ezeli) has missed about 80 games as well, can't be far off.


I'm not saying I agree with them, just that you have to apply context.




Fact is, by all statistical measures, these teams are relatively even. The Warriors defense is better, the Rockets offense better. Both have around the same SRS, and expected W/L. Both have around the same win margin, and the only real benefit the Rockets have, if they meet, is HCA.

I agree with this^

BALLER R
03-21-2014, 04:23 PM
There is no such thing as an upset when it comes to the west.

Hawkeye15
03-21-2014, 04:31 PM
You would have to take into account the impact each individual has, one starter doesn't have the same impact as the other. I would gladly argue that losing Dre for 12 games has the same impact defensively as losing Dwight. When Dre was healthy we were 3rd/4th in defensive efficiency. When he was sitting out, we were 7th/8th. That's a very significant drop.

At one point we literally didn't have any backup PFs or Cs, our bench was decimated.

Pretty sure our back up center (Ezeli) has missed about 80 games as well, can't be far off.


I'm not saying I agree with them, just that you have to apply context.

I am applying context. Missing Harden or Parsons for stretches of time didn't help them. Dwight now dealing with an ankle issue is not helping them. Losing their top scorer off the bench for a ton of games when you factor in Lin's injury and him sliding in for the injured starter another bunch of games hurts.

Injuries to key players hurt every team. Not just the Warriors. And I only make that point, because my god, don't some Warriors fans get sick of saying, "when healthy"? EVERY team can say that basically. Even the medical anomaly in Phoenix..



I agree with this^

I mean, on paper, they are so equal its ridiculous. In different ways, but their production and success is almost identical. It is so ridiculous that many Rox/Dubs fans have turned it into written warfare here, about 2 teams that we have NO idea who would win in a 7 game series. Right now, I say Rockets, because they will have 4/7 at Toyota Center.

Goose17
03-21-2014, 04:37 PM
Injuries to key players hurt every team. Not just the Warriors. And I only make that point, because my god, don't some Warriors fans get sick of saying, "when healthy"? EVERY team can say that basically. Even the medical anomaly in Phoenix...

Fair point.

mightybosstone
03-21-2014, 05:51 PM
You would have to take into account the impact each individual has, one starter doesn't have the same impact as the other. I would gladly argue that losing Dre for 12 games has the same impact defensively as losing Dwight. When Dre was healthy we were 3rd/4th in defensive efficiency. When he was sitting out, we were 7th/8th. That's a very significant drop.
I'd be curious to see those numbers for the Rockets wen they were without Beverley, because he has a huge defensive impact on that team, and he missed even more time than Iggy did.


At one point we literally didn't have any backup PFs or Cs, our bench was decimated. Pretty sure our back up center (Ezeli) has missed about 80 games as well, can't be far off.
Ditto for Houston. Not only has Asik missed the majority of the season, but people keep forgetting how good Greg Smith was last season and the fact that he's missed essentially the entire year. That's their No. 2 C and No. 2 PF who've essentially missed the bulk of 2013-14.

mightybosstone
03-21-2014, 05:57 PM
The debate will end when Rockets fans admit the teams are equal at a bare mimimum, since asking them to accept that the Warriors are better is understandably unbearable.

Why should we admit that? Based on pretty much every barometer you could name to determine a team's worth, the Rockets have an edge. Record? Houston. Point differential? Houston. SRS? Houston. Hollinger's rankings? Houston. Head-to-head matchups? Houston.

I'll consider Golden State on the same level when they do something worth suggesting they're on Houston's level. At this point in the season, that is not the case. Right now, Houston is a better basketball team, and it might not be by much, but it's still a fairly significant edge. Also, I don't want to hear excuses about injuries. I've debunked that already like half a dozen times. Plus, Golden State is hardly the only team this year to have to deal with bumps and bruises.

Golden State has to prove they're as good. They have not done that this season.

Goose17
03-21-2014, 05:58 PM
Ditto for Houston. Not only has Asik missed the majority of the season, but people keep forgetting how good Greg Smith was last season and the fact that he's missed essentially the entire year. That's their No. 2 C and No. 2 PF who've essentially missed the bulk of 2013-14.

I won't lie, I completely forgot about Greg Smith.

COOLbeans
03-21-2014, 07:09 PM
Why should we admit that? Based on pretty much every barometer you could name to determine a team's worth, the Rockets have an edge. Record? Houston. Point differential? Houston. SRS? Houston. Hollinger's rankings? Houston. Head-to-head matchups? Houston.

I'll consider Golden State on the same level when they do something worth suggesting they're on Houston's level. At this point in the season, that is not the case. Right now, Houston is a better basketball team, and it might not be by much, but it's still a fairly significant edge. Also, I don't want to hear excuses about injuries. I've debunked that already like half a dozen times. Plus, Golden State is hardly the only team this year to have to deal with bumps and bruises.

Golden State has to prove they're as good. They have not done that this season.

Prove what to Houston? You're acting like your team won the west or has had championships lately. You're an unproven commodity, who hasn't gone further into the playoffs than the Warriors in recent history. When's the last time the Rockets have even won a series?

If anything your people have something to prove not ours.

Asik's better
03-21-2014, 07:14 PM
Prove what to Houston? You're acting like your team won the west or has had championships lately. You're an unproven commodity, who hasn't gone further into the playoffs than the Warriors in recent history. When's the last time the Rockets have even won a series?

If anything your people have something to prove not ours.

Your people? No need to bring race into it.

COOLbeans
03-21-2014, 07:32 PM
Your people? No need to bring race into it.

It's always a factor, this is the United States. and your people need to win a series before trying to dictate terms on who needs to prove what..

Asik's better
03-21-2014, 07:41 PM
It's always a factor, this is the United States. and your people need to win a series before trying to dictate terms on who needs to prove what..

Man who knew COOLbeans was a racist.

Hawkeye15
03-21-2014, 07:50 PM
I won't lie, I completely forgot about Greg Smith.

He and Omar are the center options off the bench. They have missed 90 games this year.

COOLbeans
03-21-2014, 08:37 PM
Man who knew COOLbeans was a racist.

Sorry i forgot Australia was a color blind society, didn't mean to offend you, my friend :rolleyes:

COOLbeans
03-21-2014, 08:40 PM
Man who knew COOLbeans was a racist.

Looking forward to destroying your people in the playoffs. Hopefully you guys keep losing games so you'll definitely be in the 4th or 5th seed because we're most likely moving up.

tr3ymill3r
03-21-2014, 09:24 PM
Clippers and Warriors in the 1st round should and better be a lot of fun.

tr3ymill3r
03-21-2014, 09:28 PM
It's always a factor, this is the United States. and your people need to win a series before trying to dictate terms on who needs to prove what..

And your people need to win more games or lose more games to avoid the Clippers in round 1 and a quit exit.

COOLbeans
03-21-2014, 10:37 PM
And your people need to win more games or lose more games to avoid the Clippers in round 1 and a quit exit.

I cant see the Warriors losing the Clippers, my friend

eDush
03-21-2014, 11:06 PM
when you guys started out so hot early in the season, I remember I brought up this stretch specifically.

Look, Portland is the most well balanced team in the league possibly. They have more players with 5 win shares than any other team easily. You have no weak link as a starter, and no elite as a starter. Bench is solid. Its why LMA has been overrated this year, as was Lillard. There just isn't a noticeable weak link. But, it will be up to Stotts come playoff time to steer them into the 04' Pistons type run, because that was a similar team in that nobody on their roster was a superstar, but every starter was an above average starter to very good player.

My money is that Portland loses round 1 to Houston, but we shall see.

I would take that bet. The Blazers match up very well against them then other teams in our conference other than Memphis, if they can keep everyone healthy.

mightybosstone
03-21-2014, 11:52 PM
Prove what to Houston? You're acting like your team won the west or has had championships lately. You're an unproven commodity, who hasn't gone further into the playoffs than the Warriors in recent history. When's the last time the Rockets have even won a series?

If anything your people have something to prove not ours.

First off, I have no ****ing clue what "my people" is supposed to mean. My favorite team? Okay. But don't say "my people." That makes no sense.

Semantics aside, while I understand your argument, it's not a good one. You're suggesting that a single postseason series victory a year ago means the Warriors have less to prove than the Rockets. ********. One playoff series means exactly dick. Plus, these are two completely different basketball teams this season, so let's not pretend like the rosters are remotely identical to last season's. They're not.

Also, note that at NO POINT in my post did I say anything about last season. I'm addressing who the better basketball team is this season and right now. I'm not concerning myself with last year, because last year means absolutely nothing to me. Houston didn't have Dwight. They had literally zero starting quality PFs. This team is far more talented and one year has meant so much to so many of Houston's young players.

Last year meant nothing, and quit trying to impress us with a playoff series victory over an underwhelming Denver team that hadn't had legitimate playoff success since Melo left, was playing without Gallo and fired their coach immediately after the end of the season. No one's impressed by that. At all.

Asik's better
03-22-2014, 12:12 AM
Sorry i forgot Australia was a color blind society, didn't mean to offend you, my friend :rolleyes:


Looking forward to destroying your people in the playoffs. Hopefully you guys keep losing games so you'll definitely be in the 4th or 5th seed because we're most likely moving up.

Your coming up with wierd excuses for your racism. But hey, whatever floats your boat right.

John Walls Era
03-22-2014, 03:27 AM
On paper Rockets are better, but then you have to consider the intangibles from the big guy and the coaching. Then Warriors are better.

goku
03-22-2014, 03:40 AM
On paper Rockets are better, but then you have to consider the intangibles from the big guy and the coaching. Then Warriors are better.

McHale has out coach mark Jackson in head to head match ups

John Walls Era
03-23-2014, 04:19 AM
McHale has out coach mark Jackson in head to head match ups

overall.

i believe the thread was regarding the OVERALL rankings, not h2h. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Hawkeye15
03-23-2014, 07:29 AM
I cant see the Warriors losing the Clippers, my friend

really? I think both teams should try anything possible to avoid the Clippers or Thunder.

Goose17
03-23-2014, 12:23 PM
really? I think both teams should try anything possible to avoid the Clippers or Thunder.

I see no reason we should be looking to avoid the Clippers.

Chronz
03-23-2014, 12:32 PM
I see no reason we should be looking to avoid the Clippers.

Is there really any team you would feel safe against (aside from Portland?) At this point I might go the JB route and favor HCA more than ever. I will say tho, I was hoping to avoid the Dubs in R.1 but they've looked vulnerable of late. I put them in the same tier with Memphis in my imaginary power rankings.

CluTcH_c1tY
03-23-2014, 01:54 PM
Rockets need to avoid the Clippers and Thunder at all costs. Right now as it is set up I like the course of playing Portland and possibly the Spurs in the end round. If I was a Warriors fan I don't know why in hell you would want to play the Clippers in the 1st round.

Clippersfan86
03-23-2014, 03:16 PM
Warriors fans want to play the Clippers due to regular season success H2H last few years. Still think we take them in 6 competitive games with HCA and Redick back. Warriors got sliced up for 18/6 by Granger off the bench last time and don't have the bench to match up. Clippers just have too much depth now in my opinion.

Goose17
03-23-2014, 05:35 PM
Is there really any team you would feel safe against (aside from Portland?) At this point I might go the JB route and favor HCA more than ever. I will say tho, I was hoping to avoid the Dubs in R.1 but they've looked vulnerable of late. I put them in the same tier with Memphis in my imaginary power rankings.

I don't feel "safe" against any team but at the same time I don't think any team is "safe" from us. I genuinely believe San Antonio is the only team we can't beat in a seven game series, or at the very least, where the odds aren't in our favour.

Against Houston, Clippers, Memphis, whoever, I feel like it's 50/50. Anyone could win. I'm not looking to avoid anyone though, because I don't want my team to beat anyone but the best, there's no pride in making it to the conference finals if you've played two teams who can't match up with you. Not interested in the easy route, interested in earning it.



Warriors fans want to play the Clippers due to regular season success H2H last few years.

Not at all. I want to play the Clippers because there's no team I want to knock out of the playoffs more. And it would probably be the best series of the entire playoffs. If you're going to win, beat the best. There's no pride in knocking out the Mavs or whatever.



Warriors got sliced up for 18/6 by Granger off the bench last time and don't have the bench to match up. Clippers just have too much depth now in my opinion.

Fair enough, I don't think depth really factors into 8/9 man rotations though.

What will your 8 man rotation be? The starters + Collison, Crawford, Big Baby and Granger/Green

Against Warriors starters + Barnes, Blake, O'Neal and Crawford/Green.

I really don't think it's going to be as big a factor as you seem to think. Especially if Barnes does what he did last year, a sub par regular season and a stellar post season.

Clippersfan86
03-23-2014, 09:59 PM
Goose I understand wanting to play the Clippers. I admit a series of those two teams would be a classic. I just know we had beaten the Grizzlies something like 11 of 15 times over 3 years before they bounced us last year. Last year alone we were 3-1 with huge win margins including by 26 in Memphis without CP3.

Point is... it's been proven time and time again that regular season H2H means nothing come playoff time. Coaching edges in the playoffs become more obvious. I give Jackson pretty much zero chance to outcoach Doc in a 7 game series.

NBA_Starter
03-23-2014, 10:19 PM
If I were either team I wouldn't really be looking forward to facing the other to be honest.

FOBolous
03-23-2014, 10:58 PM
lol at how cocky warriors fans are and how proud they are for beating a team in the playoffs last year that has been historically bad in the playoffs and had no stars :laugh2:

Goose17
03-24-2014, 03:06 AM
Goose I understand wanting to play the Clippers. I admit a series of those two teams would be a classic. I just know we had beaten the Grizzlies something like 11 of 15 times over 3 years before they bounced us last year. Last year alone we were 3-1 with huge win margins including by 26 in Memphis without CP3.

Point is... it's been proven time and time again that regular season H2H means nothing come playoff time. Coaching edges in the playoffs become more obvious. I give Jackson pretty much zero chance to outcoach Doc in a 7 game series.

Jackson out coached George Karl. And coached two wins against the Spurs, the only team other than Miami that took a game from San Antonio last year was us.

Just saying, **** happens. And you're right regular season H2H means very little. But let's be clear. There is NO team in the West I want to play in the first round more than the Clippers. Not one. And it has nothing to do with the regular season results.

sunsfan88
03-24-2014, 03:49 AM
Warriors vs Clippers series would have no defense played what so ever. Not cause neither team can play defense but because both teams are just too damn talented offensively. It would be amazing to watch.

FOBolous
03-24-2014, 04:07 AM
Jackson out coached George Karl. And coached two wins against the Spurs, the only team other than Miami that took a game from San Antonio last year was us.

Just saying, **** happens. And you're right regular season H2H means very little. But let's be clear. There is NO team in the West I want to play in the first round more than the Clippers. Not one. And it has nothing to do with the regular season results.

this is how Rockets fans feel about the Warriors. Other than Portland, there is NO team in the West I want to play in the playoffs more than the Warriors :cool: Clippers, on the other hand, are deep and dangerous....I hope the standings stay the way they are now. If they do, I'm rooting for the Warriors. I want yall take out the Clippers for us :clap:

COOLbeans
03-24-2014, 04:10 AM
I believe you

tredigs
03-24-2014, 04:15 AM
I'm rooting to play the Clippers or OKC simply because that will be an exciting, fantastic series to watch. I don't personally find Houston's brand of excessive foul shooting entertaining, so I'd prefer to watch them get knocked out in round 1 by Portland. But, they'll be the favorite.

Goose17
03-24-2014, 04:53 AM
this is how Rockets fans feel about the Warriors. Other than Portland, there is NO team in the West I want to play in the playoffs more than the Warriors :cool: Clippers, on the other hand, are deep and dangerous....I hope the standings stay the way they are now. If they do, I'm rooting for the Warriors. I want yall take out the Clippers for us :clap:

I want to play them because they keep up with us. They match us blow for blow. And I don't want easy wins. Win or lose, if you've played the best and brought your best you can walk away with your head held high. That's the way I see it anyway.

Plus, Warriors - Clippers is turning into an incredible rivalry and it would just be an incredibly fun series to watch.

Plus I hate the L.A teams. Nobody I want to beat more.

Goose17
03-24-2014, 04:54 AM
If Houston face Portland I'm confident that Portland get swept.

JJ_JKidd
03-24-2014, 05:33 AM
Not a Hollinger believer since forever

Asik's better
03-24-2014, 05:58 AM
lol at how cocky warriors fans are and how proud they are for beating a team in the playoffs last year that has been historically bad in the playoffs and had no stars :laugh2:


I'm rooting to play the Clippers or OKC simply because that will be an exciting, fantastic series to watch. I don't personally find Houston's brand of excessive foul shooting entertaining, so I'd prefer to watch them get knocked out in round 1 by Portland. But, they'll be the favorite.
Damn we were so close. So so close of this thread having no rockets and warrior fans not taking pot shots at each other. Oh well. Maybe next time.

valade16
03-24-2014, 12:17 PM
I'm rooting to play the Clippers or OKC simply because that will be an exciting, fantastic series to watch. I don't personally find Houston's brand of excessive foul shooting entertaining, so I'd prefer to watch them get knocked out in round 1 by Portland. But, they'll be the favorite.

Unfortunately Houston decimates Portland’s main weakness, interior D. Portland actually has very good 3 point defense, and this is by design. They want to force everyone to drive in or shoot bad jump shots, however Houston and Harden just drive away and get a billion fouls.

Also, we don’t double team hardly ever, and are content to let Robin Lopez go one on one, and Dwight feasts on him. Of all the matchups Portland could have, I think we match up with the Rockets the worst.



If Houston face Portland I'm confident that Portland get swept.

That being said, no way we get swept lol. I mean, I understand y’all think your teams (Clippers, Warriors, and Rockets) are the best teams since the Russell Celtics and you guys are all ready to just run roughshod over everyone in the playoffs but damn, how about a little reality.

The Blazers are a pretty good team too. In fact, all you Warrior fans swooning over your amazing offense, the Blazers is better.

tredigs
03-24-2014, 12:23 PM
Damn we were so close. So so close of this thread having no rockets and warrior fans not taking pot shots at each other. Oh well. Maybe next time.

I'll admit my comment was a bit infused with a backhand due to your honorary team trolls post, but it's also 100% how I feel. No team shoots more Free Throws than the Rockets (you can even go back 5 years and not find a team that shoots more free throws than them), and it's not a brand of basketball I find entertaining (I remember a thread on a rival site recently asking whether they found Harden entertaining to watch, and the poll was heavily on the 'no' side in the general forum. It's not a unique take). So, despite the fact that I think they will win a series against Portland, I'd rather them get ousted. -shrug

Cal827
03-24-2014, 12:52 PM
Pacers 8th, Raptors 9th..... Well I know who I want to see in the second round lol

Goose17
03-24-2014, 01:21 PM
That being said, no way we get swept lol. I mean, I understand y’all think your teams (Clippers, Warriors, and Rockets) are the best teams since the Russell Celtics and you guys are all ready to just run roughshod over everyone in the playoffs but damn, how about a little reality.


When did I ever say that? I think we have just as good a chance at defeating any playoff team as we do to lose. Only exception is San Antonio, odds are heavily in their favor. Clippers, Houston, OKC etc shouldn't worry about us any more or less than we worry about them, those series could go any way.




The Blazers are a pretty good team too. In fact, all you Warrior fans swooning over your amazing offense, the Blazers is better.

But their defense sucks.

Our defense > Portlands offense.

Houstons defense > Portlands offense.

tredigs
03-24-2014, 01:46 PM
What's your rationale for Houston/Golden State's D being better than Portland's offense?

valade16
03-24-2014, 02:23 PM
What's your rationale for Houston/Golden State's D being better than Portland's offense?

Exactly. I could see an argument that GSW's Offense is better than Portland's Defense to a greater degree than Portland's offense is better than GSW's defense.

But to say GSW's defense is better than Portland's offense? Portland has the best offense in the league by most measurements. Not sure what he's talking about there...

tredigs
03-24-2014, 02:47 PM
Exactly. I could see an argument that GSW's Offense is better than Portland's Defense to a greater degree than Portland's offense is better than GSW's defense.

But to say GSW's defense is better than Portland's offense? Portland has the best offense in the league by most measurements. Not sure what he's talking about there...
Yeah, I don't know.

Chronz
03-24-2014, 03:00 PM
When did I ever say that? I think we have just as good a chance at defeating any playoff team as we do to lose. Only exception is San Antonio, odds are heavily in their favor. Clippers, Houston, OKC etc shouldn't worry about us any more or less than we worry about them, those series could go any way.

I love how optimistic you guys are though, I would be too in your position. There are great points to raise for every team in the league, it just so happens that your teams shortcomings will likely cost them a chance at HCA. But Im also getting the sense that other fan bases would rather play the Warriors than the alternative fringe contenders. Memphis is looking scary, to the point where the Warriors could be dubbed the team all the fringe contenders would rather play.

FOBolous
03-24-2014, 03:19 PM
I love how optimistic you guys are though, I would be too in your position. There are great points to raise for every team in the league, it just so happens that your teams shortcomings will likely cost them a chance at HCA. But Im also getting the sense that other fan bases would rather play the Warriors than the alternative fringe contenders. Memphis is looking scary, to the point where the Warriors could be dubbed the team all the fringe contenders would rather play.

agreed 100%. The Rockets matchup up horribily versus the Grizzlies.

torocan
03-24-2014, 03:26 PM
Memphis is looking scary, to the point where the Warriors could be dubbed the team all the fringe contenders would rather play.

Nobody in their right minds wants to play the Grizzlies.

The problem with the Grizzlies is that even IF you're better, and even IF you beat them, they're SO physical that your team comes out of a Memphis series exhausted and beat up.

You might be tired from running up and down the floor against GSW, or the Rockets, or from chasing Parker around screens all night, but that just doesn't compare to the abuse you take when you're banging down low for 6 or 7 games against Gasol and Zbo.

Tired is one thing, beaten up and bruised is a different kettle of fish.

IF you have to meet the Grizzlies, you want it to be in the Finals. Simply put, if you face them in the 1st round, your chance of surviving the 2nd round and WCF goes WAY down.

Goose17
03-24-2014, 03:50 PM
Portland has the best offense in the league by most measurements. Not sure what he's talking about there...

And what measurements are those? I don't see how they have the number one offense in any way shape or form.

They're 4th in offensive efficiency.
11th in eFG% (compared to GSWs 9th).
10th in Assist ratio (compared to GSWs 9th)
Tied 6th in 3pt% with GSW.
2nd in points per game(behind Clippers)
Their adjusted field goal % has them outside of the top 10.
They are just inside the top 10 for points per shot.


Where exactly are they number #1? In which offensive statistical category?

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 03:54 PM
And what measurements are those? I don't see how they have the number one offense in any way shape or form.

They're 4th in offensive efficiency.
11th in eFG% (compared to GSWs 9th).
10th in Assist ratio (compared to GSWs 9th)
Tied 6th in 3pt% with GSW.
2nd in points per game(behind Clippers)
Their adjusted field goal % has them outside of the top 10.
They are just inside the top 10 for points per shot.


Where exactly are they number #1? In which offensive statistical category?

they are #1 in points per 100 possessions, or offensive efficiency rating. They have hit the most 3's in the league, and are 6th in FT's made. Those are efficiency boosters like no other.

Overall, they have had the most efficient offense in the NBA this year.

Goose17
03-24-2014, 04:03 PM
they are #1 in points per 100 possessions, or offensive efficiency rating. They have hit the most 3's in the league, and are 6th in FT's made. Those are efficiency boosters like no other.

Overall, they have had the most efficient offense in the NBA this year.

They made the most 3s but shoot the same percentage as the Dubs, which only means they're TAKING more, not that they're better at getting them. That doesn't make you the number one offense.

They're 12th in FT/FGA so I don't see how their free throw % is relevant if they can't draw enough fouls for it to be a real impact.

You're right, they're #1 in ORtg, but I don't accept that as proof of having the best offense in the entire league, not when you look at all of the other offensive stats like the ones I mentioned. Their margin of victory isn't even top 5.

torocan
03-24-2014, 04:08 PM
they are #1 in points per 100 possessions, or offensive efficiency rating. They have hit the most 3's in the league, and are 6th in FT's made. Those are efficiency boosters like no other.

Overall, they have had the most efficient offense in the NBA this year.

Teamrankings has them #10 in True Shooting%, which I consider a better measure of offensive impact than the generic 'offensive efficiency' that a lot of generic sport sites use.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/true-shooting-percentage

Making FT's off fouls still counts on the scoreboard the last time I checked...

Though to be fair, Teamrankings has them rated #2 in offensive efficiency using their own formula. Still not #1.

Guppyfighter
03-24-2014, 04:10 PM
Offensive efficiency isn't "generic."

It's literally what happened. True shooting is great, but at that point you are measuring just one part of offense. You are essentially eliminating offensive rebounds.

astrosmaniac
03-24-2014, 04:14 PM
I want to play them because they keep up with us. They match us blow for blow. And I don't want easy wins. Win or lose, if you've played the best and brought your best you can walk away with your head held high. That's the way I see it anyway.

Plus, Warriors - Clippers is turning into an incredible rivalry and it would just be an incredibly fun series to watch.

Plus I hate the L.A teams. Nobody I want to beat more.

That kind of thought is why i want the seedings to stay the same. Houston can win round one vs portland and then we'll most likely face the spurs. Spurs/Rockets games have been real fun and close the last 2 years

tredigs
03-24-2014, 04:18 PM
Teamrankings has them #10 in True Shooting%, which I consider a better measure of offensive impact than the generic 'offensive efficiency' that a lot of generic sport sites use.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/true-shooting-percentage

Making FT's off fouls still counts on the scoreboard the last time I checked...

Though to be fair, Teamrankings has them rated #2 in offensive efficiency using their own formula. Still not #1.
You value shooting% over a stat that tells you which team averages the most points in a given 100 possessions?

They may not make as many shots, but being that they're the #2 offensive rebounding team in the league (Miami being dead last), they're creating many more opportunities for themselves and it's a big reason why they're the top ranked offense per 100 possessions (an offensive board doesn't count as a new possession, even though the clock restarts).

But, against excellent defensive rebounding teams like San Antonio, OKC and Golden State they will run into a bit more trouble in a series for some of the reasons you and Goose mentioned. Fortunately for them, Houston ranks in the bottom 10 in defensive rebounding, so it's an advantage they should be able to still exploit some if they face off.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 04:18 PM
They made the most 3s but shoot the same percentage as the Dubs, which only means they're TAKING more, not that they're better at getting them. That doesn't make you the number one offense.

They're 12th in FT/FGA so I don't see how their free throw % is relevant if they can't draw enough fouls for it to be a real impact.

You're right, they're #1 in ORtg, but I don't accept that as proof of having the best offense in the entire league, not when you look at all of the other offensive stats like the ones I mentioned. Their margin of victory isn't even top 5.

The name of the game is hitting 3's and FT's, and that is what Portland does. Hence why they are the best offensive team, efficiency wise.

Remember too, outside LMA's recent injuries, they haven't had an injury issue AT ALL. The other 4 starters haven't missed a game. I don't think Portland is getting out of round 1, but I do think they can pour points in quickly.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 04:20 PM
Teamrankings has them #10 in True Shooting%, which I consider a better measure of offensive impact than the generic 'offensive efficiency' that a lot of generic sport sites use.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/true-shooting-percentage

Making FT's off fouls still counts on the scoreboard the last time I checked...

Though to be fair, Teamrankings has them rated #2 in offensive efficiency using their own formula. Still not #1.

Generic? Nah. The goal is to put as many points as possible up each possession. Portland does that better than every other team.

Look, they aren't the mid 2000's Suns or anything, they simply hit a ton of 3's and FT's, which is the goal of an efficient offense.

valade16
03-24-2014, 04:21 PM
And what measurements are those? I don't see how they have the number one offense in any way shape or form.

They're 4th in offensive efficiency.
11th in eFG% (compared to GSWs 9th).
10th in Assist ratio (compared to GSWs 9th)
Tied 6th in 3pt% with GSW.
2nd in points per game(behind Clippers)
Their adjusted field goal % has them outside of the top 10.
They are just inside the top 10 for points per shot.

Where exactly are they number #1? In which offensive statistical category?


they are #1 in points per 100 possessions, or offensive efficiency rating. They have hit the most 3's in the league, and are 6th in FT's made. Those are efficiency boosters like no other.

Overall, they have had the most efficient offense in the NBA this year.

To add to what Hawkeye said.

They’ve made the most 3 pointers at the 6th best % in the league and have the highest FT% in the league. So even though they only shoot the 12th most FTs, they make the 6th most.

They also do other things well besides shoot that boost their offensive output, such as not turning the ball over (4th best in the league TOV% [GSW 20th]) and get extra possessions (2nd best offensive rebound % [GSW 21st])

So GS shooting slightly better or the same from 3 and overall doesn’t matter because the Blazers capitalize better on their FTs, get extra possessions via offensive rebounds and not turning the ball over.

I mean, go through a checklist of what makes an offense good and they are elite in all areas:

1. 3-pt shooting
2. FTs
3. Offensive rebounds
4. Not turning the ball over

They are the most efficient offense in the NBA.

valade16
03-24-2014, 04:23 PM
Generic? Nah. The goal is to put as many points as possible up each possession. Portland does that better than every other team.

Look, they aren't the mid 2000's Suns or anything, they simply hit a ton of 3's and FT's, which is the goal of an efficient offense.

Exactly.

6th best 3pt%
1st best FT%
2nd best Off Rbds
4th best TO%

They literally do everything that you’d want from an offense at a hyper efficient level.

I honestly can’t believe we are talking about Portland’s offense in some attempt to criticize them when the defense makes such an easy target.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 04:26 PM
Exactly.

6th best 3pt%
1st best FT%
2nd best Off Rbds
4th best TO%

They literally do everything that you’d want from an offense at a hyper efficient level.

I honestly can’t believe we are talking about Portland’s offense in some attempt to criticize them when the defense makes such an easy target.

the offensive rebounds are huge, because you don't get hit with another possession, even though you essentially just created one.

torocan
03-24-2014, 04:36 PM
Offensive efficiency isn't "generic."

It's literally what happened. True shooting is great, but at that point you are measuring just one part of offense. You are essentially eliminating offensive rebounds.

Uh, I'm not sure you understand how Offensive Efficiency Rating is calculated.

By definition, Offensive Efficiency rating is calculated by many parties by ELIMINATING all offensive rebounds from the possession total completely. Offensive rebounds are generally looked at as an extension of a previous possession. They actually have no impact in Offensive Efficiency Rating other than being treated as noise.

AND there's actually more than one formula for the Offensive Efficiency Rating, being advocated by various parties.

For example, THIS is the one the NBA uses officially to determine possessions... note that they SUBTRACT all offensive rebounds from the equation to determine possessions.

Pos = .96 * (FGA + (.44*FTA) - OR + TO)

http://www.nba.com/thunder/news/stats101.html

This is completely different than the Offensive Efficiency Rating used by a site like Basketball Reference. Here is BR's formula for calculating possessions...

ScPoss = (FG_Part + AST_Part + FT_Part) * (1 - (Team_ORB / Team_Scoring_Poss) * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%) + ORB_Part

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ratings.html

Notice that they are DIFFERENT, and they factor in ORB differently. And in the case of the NBA, NOT AT ALL.

This is why I said "generic"... there is NO universal calculation for OER. It's whatever formula the site decides they want to use.

So, tossing around OER (a stat that is not universally agreed upon in terms of formulaic definition) gives limited insight, depending on how you interpret the assumptions in the calculation, and whether you agree with their assumptions.

On the other hand TS% IS universal and pretty much agreed upon by EVERYONE.

It's simply not as cut and dry as you make it...

tredigs
03-24-2014, 05:08 PM
Uh, I'm not sure you understand how Offensive Efficiency Rating is calculated.

By definition, Offensive Efficiency rating is calculated by many parties by ELIMINATING all offensive rebounds from the possession total completely. Offensive rebounds are generally looked at as an extension of a previous possession. They actually have no impact in Offensive Efficiency Rating other than being treated as noise.

AND there's actually more than one formula for the Offensive Efficiency Rating, being advocated by various parties.

For example, THIS is the one the NBA uses officially to determine possessions... note that they SUBTRACT all offensive rebounds from the equation to determine possessions.

Pos = .96 * (FGA + (.44*FTA) - OR + TO)

http://www.nba.com/thunder/news/stats101.html

This is completely different than the Offensive Efficiency Rating used by a site like Basketball Reference. Here is BR's formula for calculating possessions...

ScPoss = (FG_Part + AST_Part + FT_Part) * (1 - (Team_ORB / Team_Scoring_Poss) * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%) + ORB_Part

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ratings.html

Notice that they are DIFFERENT, and they factor in ORB differently. And in the case of the NBA, NOT AT ALL.

This is why I said "generic"... there is NO universal calculation for OER. It's whatever formula the site decides they want to use.

So, tossing around OER (a stat that is not universally agreed upon in terms of formulaic definition) gives limited insight, depending on how you interpret the assumptions in the calculation, and whether you agree with their assumptions.

On the other hand TS% IS universal and pretty much agreed upon by EVERYONE.

It's simply not as cut and dry as you make it...

Why would you care whether or not a made basket is created from a put back or a made shot in the first place? I'll take the offense that is #1 at finding ways to generate points (be it 3's, FT's, put backs or otherwise) without the other team touching the ball and having a chance to score themselves over TS% 10 times out of 10.

torocan
03-24-2014, 05:21 PM
Why would you care whether or not a made basket is created from a put back or a made shot in the first place? I'll take the offense that is #1 at finding ways to generate points (be it 3's, FT's, put backs or otherwise) without the other team touching the ball and having a chance to score themselves over TS% 10 times out of 10.

I wouldn't argue that TS% isn't perfect (none of the offensive stats are), and depending on which version of OER it's useful when taken in the context of other stats.

However, I do have issues with waving OER as an end all be all stat to prove that a team has the #1 offense, when they're not even rated #1 across every interpretation of OER, and the poster isn't clarifying WHICH version of OER they're using.

As for your question whether a basket is made from a put back or a made shot, it DOES matter. You are *always* going to miss a certain percentage of shots. Completely eliminating offensive rebounds is effectively removing an extra possession (2 possessions ... 1 from each team if you want to look at it from the perspective of gaining a possession while taking away an opponent possession simultaneously).

Treating Offensive rebounds as an extended possession is statistical laziness. For all intensive purposes, an offensive rebound is statistically identical to Defensive rebound + steal since you get A NEW SHOT CLOCK. This is why it doesn't make sense to treat a put back or standard offensive rebound as the same as a made shot.

On a per possession basis, if you have a TS% of 50%, then you have an EV of 1.00 points per possession. If my team offensive rebounds 10% of possessions, then 10% of misses will end up in another 1.00 points during those possessions which effectively raises the expected value of points per possession to 1.100 points per possession (50% misses x 10% offensive rebound x 50% TS = 0.10 EV).

So yes, it DOES matter.

valade16
03-24-2014, 05:29 PM
I wouldn't argue that TS% isn't perfect (none of the offensive stats are), and depending on which version of OER it's useful when taken in the context of other stats.

However, I do have issues with waving OER as an end all be all stat to prove that a team has the #1 offense, when they're not even rated #1 across every interpretation of OER, and the poster isn't clarifying WHICH version of OER they're using.

As for your question whether a basket is made from a put back or a made shot, it DOES matter. You are *always* going to miss a certain percentage of shots. Completely eliminating offensive rebounds is effectively removing an extra possession (2 possessions ... 1 from each team if you want to look at it from the perspective of gaining a possession while taking away an opponent possession simultaneously).

Treating Offensive rebounds as an extended possession is statistical laziness. For all intensive purposes, an offensive rebound is statistically identical to Defensive rebound + steal since you get A NEW SHOT CLOCK. This is why it doesn't make sense to treat a put back or standard offensive rebound as the same as a made shot.

On a per possession basis, if you have a TS% of 50%, then you have an EV of 1.00 points per possession. If my team offensive rebounds 10% of possessions, then 10% of misses will end up in another 1.00 points during those possessions which effectively raises the expected value of points per possession to 1.100 points per possession (50% misses x 10% offensive rebound x 50% TS = 0.10 EV).

So yes, it DOES matter.

Not sure if you are talking about me but I used far more than just OER to prove the Blazers were the most efficient offense.

As for the part about offensive rebounds, I find quite the opposite to be statistical laziness. So you’re arguing that an offensive rebound becomes a new possession and thus a way to gauge every possessions efficiency.

But what is the point of saying X team is more efficient despite knowing they will get less possessions in a standard game because they don’t get offensive rebounds.

What you’re saying is the offensive possession efficiency is more important than the offensive possession + # of possessions efficiency.

It’s not like the Blazers getting more offensive possessions is random, it can be empirically proved by their lack of turnovers and their offensive rebounding. So I’m not sure what you’re saying is really a good way of determining offensive efficiency at all.

Basically, why eliminate # of possessions in offensive efficiency calculations when it can be proved certain teams do get more possessions per game?

tredigs
03-24-2014, 05:33 PM
Why, torocan? I'm trying to put it very simply. Why would you want anything other than the offense that finds a way to score the most points per 100 trips that another team does not have control of the ball (since you don't like calling an offensive rebounding the same possession, we'll say that...).

Another reason why Portland's offense is so solid is that they're not giving it up very often via turnovers. Hell LMA has a nearly 30% Usage rate in 36+ mpg in this offense and isn't even turning it over 2 times a game. Lillard is under 2.5 himself. That's big time and adds to their boost in offensive rating (as does their elite FT% and 3pt shooting).

None are perfect obviously (and I wouldn't paint OER as an 'end/all be/all'), but as a team stat I don't see any argument for TS% over Offensive Rating. But you can start by attempting to argue the Hawks and Nets as better offenses than Portland, I guess...

Goose17
03-24-2014, 05:54 PM
Exactly.

6th best 3pt%
1st best FT%
2nd best Off Rbds
4th best TO%

They literally do everything that you’d want from an offense at a hyper efficient level.

I honestly can’t believe we are talking about Portland’s offense in some attempt to criticize them when the defense makes such an easy target.

Nobody is criticising their offense. They are one of the best offensive teams in the league. I just don't believe them to be number one and head and shoulders above all others like some claim they are.

And in the playoffs, their offense will take a serious hit. Regular season defense isn't anything compared to post season defense.

Guppyfighter
03-24-2014, 06:00 PM
All this conversation tells me is my team needs to shoot more threes.

torocan
03-24-2014, 06:18 PM
Not sure if you are talking about me but I used far more than just OER to prove the Blazers were the most efficient offense.

As for the part about offensive rebounds, I find quite the opposite to be statistical laziness. So you’re arguing that an offensive rebound becomes a new possession and thus a way to gauge every possessions efficiency.

But what is the point of saying X team is more efficient despite knowing they will get less possessions in a standard game because they don’t get offensive rebounds.

What you’re saying is the offensive possession efficiency is more important than the offensive possession + # of possessions efficiency.

It’s not like the Blazers getting more offensive possessions is random, it can be empirically proved by their lack of turnovers and their offensive rebounding. So I’m not sure what you’re saying is really a good way of determining offensive efficiency at all.

Basically, why eliminate # of possessions in offensive efficiency calculations when it can be proved certain teams do get more possessions per game?

Actually, what I'm saying is that doing an offensive efficiency calculation without considering the impact of ANY offensive rebounding is statistically lazy (which is how they calculate possessions using NBA standard).

My only beef was a previous post in response to another player's post stating OER was #1 and thus definitive, when OER wasn't qualified, and OER isn't universal, and Portland wasn't rated #1 across every interpretation of offensive efficiency.

Portland has a very good offense, I'm just not sure you can make a definitive statement that it's the #1 overall offense.

So, for example if we used TeamRankings, they have Portland as the #2 by OER, #6 fastbreak efficiency, #9 Floor%, #15 Shooting%, #11 Efg%, #6 3pt%, #17 2pt%, #1 FT%, #10 TS%, and #3 ORR%.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stats/

If you were to pull ESPN's team Points Per Shot, Portland is ranked #10

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/scoringEfficiency

So what stats definitively show that Portland has the #1 offense? See what I mean?

Anyway, that's all I was getting at.. it's really hard to say that a team is definitively #1, especially when they're not dominating across multiple offensive categories, across multiple statistical interpretations.

valade16
03-24-2014, 06:26 PM
Nobody is criticising their offense. They are one of the best offensive teams in the league. I just don't believe them to be number one and head and shoulders above all others like some claim they are.

And in the playoffs, their offense will take a serious hit. Regular season defense isn't anything compared to post season defense.

Who do you think has a better offense? Hopefully not the GSW. As has been proven, although GSW shoots a slightly higher % on their shots, they turn it over way more and don't get nearly as many offensive rebounds and thus the Blazers outscore them per 100 possessions and do so more efficiently.

So who on earth would you say is better?

And the dig about the offense not being as good in the playoffs is true for every team, not just the Blazers, so I fail to see how that is an argument for or against their offense. Unless you believe the Blazers will be the only offense that will not do as good in the playoffs...

Clippersfan86
03-24-2014, 06:30 PM
Nobody is criticising their offense. They are one of the best offensive teams in the league. I just don't believe them to be number one and head and shoulders above all others like some claim they are.

And in the playoffs, their offense will take a serious hit. Regular season defense isn't anything compared to post season defense.

Anybody saying they are head and shoulders above the rest is ignorant. Clippers starting 5 has best offensive rating in the league all year, although it's been limited due to Redick out. Then the Heat have been the top offense for much of this month. Clippers have been the 1st ranked offense the last 6 weeks or so despite missing Redick, Crawford and CP3 for lengthy stretches.

Portland is going to be in a world of hurt come playoff time because they are literally incapable of scoring consistently in the paint.

Clippersfan86
03-24-2014, 06:32 PM
Who do you think has a better offense? Hopefully not the GSW. As has been proven, although GSW shoots a slightly higher % on their shots, they turn it over way more and don't get nearly as many offensive rebounds and thus the Blazers outscore them per 100 possessions and do so more efficiently.

So who on earth would you say is better?

And the dig about the offense not being as good in the playoffs is true for every team, not just the Blazers, so I fail to see how that is an argument for or against their offense. Unless you believe the Blazers will be the only offense that will not do as good in the playoffs...

Clippers offense>>>>Blazers offense. Blazers have had a healthy starting 5 all year and still have only a .2 edge on offensive efficiency rating. Clippers on the other have had a ton of injuries to key guys all year including Redick+CP3 who are among the league leaders in offensive rating.


http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2014.html


http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2014.html


Clippers don't depend on the 3 ball to score. They kill you in more ways and have had at least 6-7 70 point halves this year and have scored more points in halves and quarters than any team including the Blazers this year. Like I said.. the scary thing is they did a lot of this with guys like Redick (16 ppg on 40 percent from 3) out.

valade16
03-24-2014, 06:34 PM
Actually, what I'm saying is that doing an offensive efficiency calculation without considering the impact of ANY offensive rebounding is statistically lazy (which is how they calculate possessions using NBA standard).

My only beef was a previous post in response to another player's post stating OER was #1 and thus definitive, when OER wasn't qualified, and OER isn't universal, and Portland wasn't rated #1 across every interpretation of offensive efficiency.

Portland has a very good offense, I'm just not sure you can make a definitive statement that it's the #1 overall offense.

So, for example if we used TeamRankings, they have Portland as the #2 by OER, #6 fastbreak efficiency, #9 Floor%, #15 Shooting%, #11 Efg%, #6 3pt%, #17 2pt%, #1 FT%, #10 TS%, and #3 ORR%.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stats/

If you were to pull ESPN's team Points Per Shot, Portland is ranked #10

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/scoringEfficiency

So what stats definitively show that Portland has the #1 offense? See what I mean?

Anyway, that's all I was getting at.. it's really hard to say that a team is definitively #1, especially when they're not dominating across multiple offensive categories, across multiple statistical interpretations.

The TeamRankings site has their offense .1 behind the Clippers, so it's not like that site doesn't think they are on the short list for best offense.

And the ESPN list is again a perfect example of why they are the best offense. They are only 10th in PPS but they have a far higher # of shots per game than any other team in the Top 10. They shoot the ball 4 more times than any other team in the top 10. Those extra shots equal the most points.

I mean, you can probably make a case for the Clippers, but other than that, who is even close to those 2?

Clippersfan86
03-24-2014, 06:35 PM
Who do you think has a better offense? Hopefully not the GSW. As has been proven, although GSW shoots a slightly higher % on their shots, they turn it over way more and don't get nearly as many offensive rebounds and thus the Blazers outscore them per 100 possessions and do so more efficiently.

So who on earth would you say is better?

And the dig about the offense not being as good in the playoffs is true for every team, not just the Blazers, so I fail to see how that is an argument for or against their offense. Unless you believe the Blazers will be the only offense that will not do as good in the playoffs...

Clippers offense>>>>Blazers offense. Blazers have had a healthy starting 5 all year and still have only a .2 edge on offensive efficiency rating. Clippers on the other have had a ton of injuries to key guys all year including Redick+CP3 who are among the league leaders in offensive rating.


http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2014.html


http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2014.html


Clippers don't depend on the 3 ball to score. They kill you in more ways and have had at least 6-7 70 point halves this year, and have scored more points in halves and quarters than any team including the Blazers this year. Like I said.. the scary thing is they did a lot of this with guys like Redick (16 ppg on 40 percent from 3) out.

Problem with the Blazers though is they can't defend worth a **** and have been a bottom 10 D all year.

tredigs
03-24-2014, 06:37 PM
^@Valad, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Miami and LAC off the top of my head are right there with them offensively and better when they're firing on all cylinders imo. Along with Portland that's the tier 1 for offense.

Clippersfan86
03-24-2014, 06:40 PM
Clippers, Spurs, Rockets all have a more sustainable playoff style offense than the Blazers. Once teams get a full series to take something away from Portland.. and focus almost entirely on guarding the perimeter... Portland will get buried. Look at how pathetic their points in the paint per game is? I remember the last game we beat Portland they had something atrocious like 12 or 14 points in the paint! Balanced offenses like the teams Tre listed are far more suitable for playoffs.

All of those teams play inside out. Unless you have a once in a generation perimeter type like Durant.. you cannot get away with neglecting paint scoring or feeding the ball down low to the extreme Portland neglects to.

valade16
03-24-2014, 06:55 PM
^@Valad, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Miami and LAC off the top of my head are right there with them offensively and better when they're firing on all cylinders imo. Along with Portland that's the tier 1 for offense.

I’d put them all in the same Tier but that doesn’t mean they all are exactly equal. I’d have the Blazers at 1A and the Clippers at 1B.
Shouldn’t part of what makes an offense the best is its consistency? If someone has the best offense when firing on all cylinders but only does that sporadically, why say they are better than a team that is just as good when firing on all cylinders, but are able to sustain their high level of play more often?

Yes, points in the paint may kill the Blazers, but we shall see. I think points in the paint allowed is more likely to kill the Blazers. It’s not like these teams haven’t tried to take away our 3 ball, they just fail because Stotts always keeps 3 good 3 point shooters on the floor at all times for spacing purposes.

Here are the Blazers 3 point shooters:
Matthews 39.8%
Lillard 39.2%
Mo Williams 37.3%
CJ McCollum 36.8%
Batum 35.9%
Wright 35.5%

3 of those guys are always in the game. That is + 3pt shooting from 3 players on the floor, it makes it hard to simply guard them all. Obviously it can be done.

valade16
03-24-2014, 06:59 PM
Clippers, Spurs, Rockets all have a more sustainable playoff style offense than the Blazers. Once teams get a full series to take something away from Portland.. and focus almost entirely on guarding the perimeter... Portland will get buried. Look at how pathetic their points in the paint per game is? I remember the last game we beat Portland they had something atrocious like 12 or 14 points in the paint! Balanced offenses like the teams Tre listed are far more suitable for playoffs.

All of those teams play inside out. Unless you have a once in a generation perimeter type like Durant.. you cannot get away with neglecting paint scoring or feeding the ball down low to the extreme Portland neglects to.

They do have a more sustainable model, but at the same time, shooting 3s will continue to be efficient so long as they keep getting open looks. Teams could take away our 3 ball.

But the last team that was set-up like ours was the 2011 Mavs and that worked out pretty well. As I said, I think our defense is more likely to be our doom than our offense.

Goose17
03-24-2014, 07:12 PM
Who do you think has a better offense? Hopefully not the GSW. As has been proven, although GSW shoots a slightly higher % on their shots, they turn it over way more and don't get nearly as many offensive rebounds and thus the Blazers outscore them per 100 possessions and do so more efficiently.

So who on earth would you say is better?

Without checking the numbers, off the top of my head, give me Clippers, Miami and San Antonio for sure. I have two more teams in mind but they're only "maybes"

Clippersfan86
03-24-2014, 07:28 PM
Pretty sure the 2011 Mavs were a top 10 defense though. Blazers have been BOTTOM 10 al year.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 07:29 PM
I wouldn't argue that TS% isn't perfect (none of the offensive stats are), and depending on which version of OER it's useful when taken in the context of other stats.

However, I do have issues with waving OER as an end all be all stat to prove that a team has the #1 offense, when they're not even rated #1 across every interpretation of OER, and the poster isn't clarifying WHICH version of OER they're using.

As for your question whether a basket is made from a put back or a made shot, it DOES matter. You are *always* going to miss a certain percentage of shots. Completely eliminating offensive rebounds is effectively removing an extra possession (2 possessions ... 1 from each team if you want to look at it from the perspective of gaining a possession while taking away an opponent possession simultaneously).

Treating Offensive rebounds as an extended possession is statistical laziness. For all intensive purposes, an offensive rebound is statistically identical to Defensive rebound + steal since you get A NEW SHOT CLOCK. This is why it doesn't make sense to treat a put back or standard offensive rebound as the same as a made shot.

On a per possession basis, if you have a TS% of 50%, then you have an EV of 1.00 points per possession. If my team offensive rebounds 10% of possessions, then 10% of misses will end up in another 1.00 points during those possessions which effectively raises the expected value of points per possession to 1.100 points per possession (50% misses x 10% offensive rebound x 50% TS = 0.10 EV).

So yes, it DOES matter.

No stat is perfect. But the bottom line is, the goal on offense, is to score as many points per possession as possible. And no team is better than the Blazers at doing that.

Basketball is broken down by possession. The teams that score the most per possession, or give up the least amount of points per possession, are respectively the best at offense or defense, no matter how they got there.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 07:31 PM
All this conversation tells me is my team needs to shoot more threes.

as long as they have capable 3 point shooters haha. My Wolves would probably drop if they did that. Not probably, for sure actually.

valade16
03-24-2014, 07:52 PM
Without checking the numbers, off the top of my head, give me Clippers, Miami and San Antonio for sure. I have two more teams in mind but they're only "maybes"

You can certainly think that, but I'd wonder if you would maintain your position once you actually saw the numbers.

mightybosstone
03-24-2014, 07:54 PM
When did this become a Blazers discussion? There's a whole lot of talk going on about a team that's barely played .500 basketball in 2014. Let's get back to the discussion about that ACTUAL contenders in the West.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 08:44 PM
When did this become a Blazers discussion? There's a whole lot of talk going on about a team that's barely played .500 basketball in 2014. Let's get back to the discussion about that ACTUAL contenders in the West.

well, they hit a murders row in their schedule. I called that out 3 months ago.

They are not contenders however.

mightybosstone
03-24-2014, 08:59 PM
well, they hit a murders row in their schedule. I called that out 3 months ago.

They are not contenders however.

Yeah, I pretty much said the same thing. There was an article a couple of months ago that examined teams' schedules at the midway point of the year. Portland, I think, had had the easiest schedule in the West up to that point, but had the hardest schedule in the West the rest of the way.

I'm not saying Portland is a bad basketball team. If they were in the East, they'd easily be the third best team without question. But in the West, I'd be stunned to see them win a playoff series. They're just too reliant on the jumper, and I do not trust their defense in the final minutes of games. They would have to shoot lights out to have a chance to beat OKC, San Antonio, the Clippers, Houston or Golden State. I'd also probably take Memphis over them in seven games.

Hawkeye15
03-24-2014, 09:14 PM
Yeah, I pretty much said the same thing. There was an article a couple of months ago that examined teams' schedules at the midway point of the year. Portland, I think, had had the easiest schedule in the West up to that point, but had the hardest schedule in the West the rest of the way.

I'm not saying Portland is a bad basketball team. If they were in the East, they'd easily be the third best team without question. But in the West, I'd be stunned to see them win a playoff series. They're just too reliant on the jumper, and I do not trust their defense in the final minutes of games. They would have to shoot lights out to have a chance to beat OKC, San Antonio, the Clippers, Houston or Golden State. I'd also probably take Memphis over them in seven games.

valade is going to hate me for this, but yeah. Portland is probably the worst team outside Dallas to be in the playoffs out west. I don't see them making it out of round 1 at all.

Clippersfan86
03-25-2014, 12:11 AM
valade is going to hate me for this, but yeah. Portland is probably the worst team outside Dallas to be in the playoffs out west. I don't see them making it out of round 1 at all.

It's not disrespect, Valade probably would agree if he was being logical. Portland literally cannot play D if their lives depend on it. Mavs, Suns, Grizzlies, Warriors.. which will tie up the seeds below them can all defend. I remember in the game we lost by 2 or 3 in Portland in OT.... we made MULTIPLE 15+ point runs to get back into the game. The team just doesn't play the D to sustain leads or hold teams at bay.

Hawkeye15
03-25-2014, 12:17 AM
It's not disrespect, Valade probably would agree if he was being logical. Portland literally cannot play D if their lives depend on it. Mavs, Suns, Grizzlies, Warriors.. which will tie up the seeds below them can all defend. I remember in the game we lost by 2 or 3 in Portland in OT.... we made MULTIPLE 15+ point runs to get back into the game. The team just doesn't play the D to sustain leads or hold teams at bay.

Mavs are easily worse than Portland dude. Their defense is atrocious. I mean, when you start Calderon/Ellis, with a declining Marion and aged Dirk, you have no defense.

Clippersfan86
03-25-2014, 12:25 AM
Mavs still scare me a little more because of Dirk's ability to take over in the playoffs. That being said didn't realize Dallas' D was quite as bad as it is. You're overstating the gap between Dallas' and Portland's defensive gap though, as it's like a .6 defensive rating difference. Both are in a similar tier.

All-In
03-25-2014, 12:38 AM
Since the All-star break Blazers give up 103.7 points per 100 possessions compared to Dallas’ 107.1 points per 100...it ranks 12 since the break….and its actually a better rating than OKC since the break….and this is also with Blazers playing without LA for some time now….I don’t think anything of the Blazers much but they defiantly tighten up on defense for sure….enough to win a title…hell no

Clippersfan86
03-25-2014, 02:15 AM
Since the All-star break Blazers give up 103.7 points per 100 possessions compared to Dallas’ 107.1 points per 100...it ranks 12 since the break….and its actually a better rating than OKC since the break….and this is also with Blazers playing without LA for some time now….I don’t think anything of the Blazers much but they defiantly tighten up on defense for sure….enough to win a title…hell no

Very helpful and good information, appreciate it. How bad was Portland's D before the break then if it's barely raised lol? Must of been bottom 5.

valade16
03-25-2014, 12:23 PM
valade is going to hate me for this, but yeah. Portland is probably the worst team outside Dallas to be in the playoffs out west. I don't see them making it out of round 1 at all.

You bastard! JK. I think we are at the bottom end of playoff teams in the West this year. We just need to get better interior D. Robin Lopez has been a breath of fresh air because last year we had JJ Hickson, so going from worst in the league by far to simply below average seemed like a monumental improvement.

I wanted us to try and trade CJ McCollum, Meyers Leonard, and a 1st Rd pick for Asik. He would have greatly improved this team.


It's not disrespect, Valade probably would agree if he was being logical. Portland literally cannot play D if their lives depend on it. Mavs, Suns, Grizzlies, Warriors.. which will tie up the seeds below them can all defend. I remember in the game we lost by 2 or 3 in Portland in OT.... we made MULTIPLE 15+ point runs to get back into the game. The team just doesn't play the D to sustain leads or hold teams at bay.

I don’t think our D is that bad. We are certainly below average but we have been playing better D lately. The problem is our D isn’t consistent and teams get into the paint easily because we run everybody off the 3pt line.


Since the All-star break Blazers give up 103.7 points per 100 possessions compared to Dallas’ 107.1 points per 100...it ranks 12 since the break….and its actually a better rating than OKC since the break….and this is also with Blazers playing without LA for some time now….I don’t think anything of the Blazers much but they defiantly tighten up on defense for sure….enough to win a title…hell no

I knew we were better. I think if we play Defense at an above average rate we will be a tough out in the playoffs. Basically, everybody wants to play us because they don’t know if we are real or not.

I get that, but you don’t want to be the team that figures out we are for real round 1 haha

All-In
03-25-2014, 01:49 PM
Very helpful and good information, appreciate it. How bad was Portland's D before the break then if it's barely raised lol? Must of been bottom 5.

Before the all-star break the Blazers were tied with the Lakers at 105.7 points per 100 possessions lol ranks 23rd overall…..so an improvement of 2 points is still an improvement

mightybosstone
03-26-2014, 09:32 AM
It's worth bringing up in this thread that with Portland completely collapsing, that Houston/Golden State first round matchup is looking more and more likely. However, that last game between Portland and Golden State could play a huge role in who gets the 5th and who gets the 6th. It's also worth mentioning that Houston could feasibly catch the Clippers, who don't exactly have a cake walk of a schedule down the stretch and who play the Rockets on Saturday.

But right now, my money is on Houston vs. Golden State in the first round. The NBA forum is going to ****ing explode in a few weeks, gentlemen.

Heediot
03-26-2014, 09:50 AM
It's worth bringing up in this thread that with Portland completely collapsing, that Houston/Golden State first round matchup is looking more and more likely. However, that last game between Portland and Golden State could play a huge role in who gets the 5th and who gets the 6th. It's also worth mentioning that Houston could feasibly catch the Clippers, who don't exactly have a cake walk of a schedule down the stretch and who play the Rockets on Saturday.

But right now, my money is on Houston vs. Golden State in the first round. The NBA forum is going to ****ing explode in a few weeks, gentlemen.

OKC has it worse with RoX, Spurs, Clips, and Pacers. Only home game there is Spurs. Not out of the question that Both LAC and Hou can catch up with their recent struggles. @ Phoenix is no gimme.

Clips have Rox, Portland on the road. OKC at home. 2 games vs. Dallas and @ Phoenix.

Houston has it the easiest with LAC and Spurs. Throw in BK as a challenge.

I think LAC and Houston leap OKC. LAC hold off Houston with the tie-breaker.

mightybosstone
03-26-2014, 10:13 AM
OKC has it worse with RoX, Spurs, Clips, and Pacers. Only home game there is Spurs. Not out of the question that Both LAC and Hou can catch up with their recent struggles. @ Phoenix is no gimme.

Clips have Rox, Portland on the road. OKC at home. 2 games vs. Dallas and @ Phoenix.

Houston has it the easiest with LAC and Spurs. Throw in BK as a challenge.

I think LAC and Houston leap OKC. LAC hold off Houston with the tie-breaker.

I just don't see it, man. Houston is 3 1/2 games behind OKC, and while I'd love to see the Rockets leap frog them, the Thunder also have the tie breaker in that series. That's essentially four games Houston would have to make up in these last 12. They'd have go to 10-2 or 11-1 at the very least just have a chance at it. Now, I could feasibly see the Clippers passing the Thunder, but not Houston.

That being said, anything is possible and the Thunder certainly haven't played their best basketball as of late. The only real lock in the West are the Spurs as the No. 1 seed.

valade16
03-26-2014, 01:01 PM
Portland will be out of the playoffs if we don't get LMA back ASAP.