PDA

View Full Version : Harder strength of schedule vs. higher win margin



RLundi
11-22-2014, 11:32 AM
Which is the better indicator of just how good a team is?

For example, Houston has a sterling 9-3 record with the 7th best win differential in the league at 5.2 points. But they have had the second easiest schedule so far according to strength of schedule at .441.

On the other hand, Sacramento sits at a respectable 7-5 but they've had the second most difficult strength of schedule in the league at .587. At the same time, they only win games by a margin of 1.8 points, good for second worst in the west among playoff teams.

So I guess what I'm asking is considering the numbers, which team is the better one, Sacramento or Houston? Which variable gives a better indication of future success?

-Kobe24-TJ19-
11-22-2014, 11:41 AM
strength of schedule

who cares about blowing out crappy teams...its all about winning good teams

likemystylez
11-22-2014, 12:13 PM
strength of schedule

who cares about blowing out crappy teams...its all about winning good teams

well its an indication of controlling games. When the rockets have to fight down the stretch to beat the 76ers, and they allow many other teams to stay in games they shouldnt be able to stay in. Sooner or later down the road- as long as the rockets are putting themselves in positions to lose to lesser opponents by not being up a confortable margin the last 6-8 minutes of the game- they will eventually start to lose more games as the competition gets better.

Some people on the other hand seem to go by the thought that a win is a win. And technically speaking thats true on an individual game basis, and I definitely learn more in that direction during the playoffs. Seeing as the season is young- I think its worth looking at both strength of schedule and margin of defeat.... to figure out how the rest of the season will play out

tredigs
11-22-2014, 12:24 PM
Which is the better indicator of just how good a team is?

For example, Houston has a sterling 9-3 record with the 7th best win differential in the league at 5.2 points. But they have had the second easiest schedule so far according to strength of schedule at .441.

On the other hand, Sacramento sits at a respectable 7-5 but they've had the second most difficult strength of schedule in the league at .587. At the same time, they only win games by a margin of 1.8 points, good for second worst in the west among playoff teams.

So I guess what I'm asking is considering the numbers, which team is the better one, Sacramento or Houston? Which variable gives a better indication of future success?

Why not just account for both using SRS? Sacramento has been much better than Houston.
http://http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015.html

Or Hollinger's Power Rankings uses a similar approach: http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings

Houston falls right around the top 10 and Sac just in it so far, which seems about right watching them play.

Miltstar
11-22-2014, 12:28 PM
I think Cleveland has had one of the rougher scheduals so far, I don't think they're as bad as they've shown

tredigs
11-22-2014, 12:36 PM
I think Cleveland has had one of the rougher scheduals so far, I don't think they're as bad as they've shown

Negative ghost rider. Average schedule. They've played the West a lot, but 4 of 6 were against non playoff teams, and two of their last 3 losses in a row were home games. Their next 4 are at home too though, and all against the weak *** East. They should come out a couple games over .500

ThuglifeJ
11-22-2014, 12:44 PM
Houston hasnt impressed anyone. Almost losing to Sixer's? Losing to LA? Blown out by Memphis.

likemystylez
11-22-2014, 12:46 PM
I think Cleveland has had one of the rougher scheduals so far, I don't think they're as bad as they've shown

LOL any team in the east couldnt have that tough of a schedule

MrfadeawayJB
11-22-2014, 12:52 PM
I like looking at quality wins, road wins, and winning games in tough situations (b2b, 3 games in 5 days, etc) as a better indicator.

Jamiecballer
11-22-2014, 01:02 PM
Which is the better indicator of just how good a team is?

For example, Houston has a sterling 9-3 record with the 7th best win differential in the league at 5.2 points. But they have had the second easiest schedule so far according to strength of schedule at .441.

On the other hand, Sacramento sits at a respectable 7-5 but they've had the second most difficult strength of schedule in the league at .587. At the same time, they only win games by a margin of 1.8 points, good for second worst in the west among playoff teams.

So I guess what I'm asking is considering the numbers, which team is the better one, Sacramento or Houston? Which variable gives a better indication of future success?

margin of victory is the best indicator of how good a team is IMO. because of the nature of the game, most games tend to move closer to even at the end regardless of opponent.

ThuglifeJ
11-22-2014, 03:17 PM
And the knowledgeable eye test is the best...how well they execute..how efficient they get shots for role players... chemistry...pace setting..how well they're rebounding/scoring/intimidating/etc

Too many factors in matchups to just judge by W L and schedule..or even stats for the most part. Sometimes teams rest..sometimes they're back to back..sometimes an injured player throws off chemistry..sometimes the defenders are more motivated one night. Sometimes a player is just off..

Sanjay
11-22-2014, 08:39 PM
Strength of schedule. A double-overtime 1 point win over the Spurs is much better than a 25 point win over the 76ers.

Goose17
11-23-2014, 08:46 AM
Interesting point made during the Warriors - Utah game. As soon as we brought in the bench mob in the 3rd quarter and the 4th, the turnovers increased and the margin decreased. Which sort of skews the stats really, we probably would have had half as many turnovers and won by about 25-30 points instead of 13 points. So if this happens consistently against lesser teams, how well can you trust the margin of victory? Stats don't always tell the whole truth.

That said I tend to go buy SRS, you can't just use that as the be all and end all though. You have to take other things into account.

likemystylez
11-23-2014, 10:48 AM
[QUOTE=Goose17;29291535]Interesting point made during the Warriors - Utah game. As soon as we brought in the bench mob in the 3rd quarter and the 4th, the turnovers increased and the margin decreased. Which sort of skews the stats really, we probably would have had half as many turnovers and won by about 25-30 points instead of 13 points. So if this happens consistently against lesser teams, how well can you trust the margin of victory? Stats don't always tell the whole truth.

That said I tend to go buy SRS, you can't just use that as the be all and end all though. You have to take other things into account.[/QUOT

Margin doesn't tell everything. And you have to look at the margin over a wide variety of games (blow outs, tight wins, tight losses, bad losses, home games, road games, back to backs, etc.) While its true that every game is different and in game you can make a list of specific reasons the score ended up the way it did.....its still a good indicator of how well a team is able to control a large portion of the games they are in.

Having said that- even right now the sample size is pretty low to get any solid information, and looking at one game here and there is pointless. (no pun intended)

But referring to the warriors blow out against the jazz, and how it could have been 8 or 10 points higher of a margin. A few things to take from that game that could lead to better margin numbers in future games.

1) Keeping all the starters under 26 minutes is more likely to keep them fresh for upcoming games and give them an advantage going against future opponents that should help their margin.

2) It gives the coaching staff time to experiment with different line ups out there that work... and ones that dont work. This information should help them control future games (win or loss) better and help their margins.

3) Bringing in a line up of all end of the bench reserves to play long stretches of minutes could be hard to watch, and not very margin friendly LOL. However- hopefully bringing them in for these stretches makes them better, or at least helps them cut down on some of the stupid mistakes. It also keeps them ready for future games when they might have to move up in the rotation due to foul trouble or injuries- and again this could help future margins.


ALso- while this margin went down a lot for the warriors. There will be other games then they are up by 3 or 4 in the last minute and the other team keeps fouling and the margin ends up being 7 or 8 when it should have been lower.

Hopefully over the course of atleast 30-50 games, you have a good mix of different situations

likemystylez
11-23-2014, 10:51 AM
Strength of schedule. A double-overtime 1 point win over the Spurs is much better than a 25 point win over the 76ers.

what if the spurs were resting all their starters


LOL- but if not... a double overtime 1 point loss is probably more impressive than a 25 point blow out over the 76ers

Chronz
11-23-2014, 12:21 PM
Historically speaking, blow out victories mean more than close wins. Doesn't really matter who it comes against but I think wins vs this years Sixers are the exception. A win against them in any fashion doesn't mean ****.

Sactown
11-23-2014, 12:53 PM
Sad thing is we should have two 20+ wins but we decided we would prefer to lose those games and that's the end

RLundi
11-24-2014, 12:19 PM
Why not just account for both using SRS? Sacramento has been much better than Houston.
http://http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015.html

Or Hollinger's Power Rankings uses a similar approach: http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings

Houston falls right around the top 10 and Sac just in it so far, which seems about right watching them play.

Have not heard of SRS ... is it legitimate?

Goose17
11-24-2014, 03:37 PM
Have not heard of SRS ... is it legitimate?

As legit as the others being discussed in here. It's just SOS and MOV both taken into account.

Sactown
11-24-2014, 04:31 PM
Houston is also missing one of its best players, I think Houston is a better team than Sacramento, but clearly the gap is much smaller than years past