Reply With Quote
Damn, 19 teams are .500 or better
Cleveland: 24-10 vs. +.500 teams, +15 Road Win/Home Loss Differential, + 6.7 Point Differential
LA Lakers: 25-14 vs. +.500, +12 RW/HL, +6.4 PD
Orlando: 21-16 vs. +.500, +11 RW/HL, +5.6 PD
Boston: 19-14 vs. +.500, +11 RW/HL, +4.9 PD
Denver: 23-11 vs. +.500, +8 RW/HL, +4.8 PD
Utah: 23-17 vs. +.500, +6 RW/HL, +4.8 PD
Atlanta: 21-15 vs +.500, +8 RW/HL, +4.5 PD
San Antonio: 14-20 vs. +.500, +2 RW/HL, +4.2 PD
Zombie Sonics: 16-21 vs. +.500, +6 RW/HL, +3.0 PD
Phoenix: 20-18 vs. +.500, +8 RW/HL, +2.8 PD
Portland: 19-20 vs. +.500, +2 RW/HL, +2.3 PD
Dallas: 22-17 vs. +.500, +9 RW/HL, +2.0 PD
Miami: 14-24 vs. +.500, +2 RW/HL, +1.4 PD
Houston: 15-24 vs. +.500, Even RW/HL, +0.7 PD
Milwaukee: 11-21 vs. +.500, +1 RW/HL, +.06. PD
Toronto: 13-21 vs. +.500, +2 RW/HL, -0.2 PD
Chicago: 13-18 vs. +.500, +3 RW/HL, -0.9 PD
Memphis: 14-18 vs. +.500, Even RW/HL, -1.0 PD
New Orleans: 14-22 vs. +.500, +2 RW/HL, -1.5 PD
Damn, 19 teams are .500 or better
How do the Spurs have such a great PD when they've been slightly better than mediocre all season and have trouble beating good teams?
this is where hollinger should swoop in. good question though.
Only explanation is that they have to be stomping the bad teams they play.
How fun it would be to actually have the Thunder be known as Zombie Sonics...I'd be down for that name change...
San Antonio's Pythagorean record (what they should be) is 35-20:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2010.html
+ losses to good teams have been by < 10 points .. all close games, hardly any blowouts... leads me to believe its a 4th quarter execution problem. Dont know if it can/will be solved though.
Dallas gets penalized by the models for having such a ty PD relative to their record. Their P W-L Record should be 33-25:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DAL/2010.html
I think they were sliding downwards before the trade, so it's not really reflective of the kind of team they have NOW.
Because we have won a lot of games by blowouts and all our loses (except one or two games) have been close affairs (and in a lot of them we were winning by a considerable margin late in games)
Well, let's do a comparison shall we?
OKC:
Seattle:
Zombie Sonics Logo:
Sonics Logo:
OKC women:
Seattle women:
When it comes to the Mavs you should take everything with a pinch of salt, they were doing well early on and than had a terrible January. One of the reasons was health, with both Josh and Damp in and out of the lineup. The other was a tough schedule.
However, given the drastic change that this trade gives them, you should really only see how they perform after the trade. And the statistics show they are doing well, going 5-1, holding every team under 100 and some close to 90, most of the wins have been close to double digits, and they have beaten the Suns, Magic and LA in the period.
The fact Manu is returning to old form should help their 4th quarter execution out a lot offensively, the problem is that the lockdown D SA used to play to close games out isn't there mostly because of the SF and C position, arguably the two most important positions on defense.
Stats only go so far. When two playoff teams play each other, more often then not, there's gonna be a point in the 4th quarter when the game is winnable for both teams so it becomes a compe ion of which one can close the game out better. The fact one team was able to beat the Pacers by 20 and the other team only beat the Pacers by 12 has no impact in the game.
or scoring late to make blowouts look closer when they lose
The Spurs' stats are inflated because we've been the best team in the NBA against bad teams so far this season..the numbers will even out with this tough schedule, unless the Spurs step up, which is unlikely..
The Mavs are about to hit an extremely soft part of the schedule. The next three are games that they could lose (@ Atlanta, vs. NOLA, @ Charlotte), then they get some cupcakes:
vs. Minnesota
vs. Sacto
@ Chicago
@ Minnesota
vs. Devin "Jesus Christ" Harris
vs. New York
vs. Chicago
They should only lose one game during that stretch (@ Chicago).
I don't think think we "should" lose to Chicago. We could, but I don't think we will.
Btw, have we not played Chicago yet at all this year? Is that the only team we have yet to play?
yup spurs have been blown out about 2 or 3 times this entire season. Interesting fact. Spurs have been close to win pretty much every ballgame.
Pop's crazy rotations have been a reason why we lose so many close ones. We could easily have 2nd best record in the West
Is that supposed to matter? Your team still sucks.
hi mavfan
I live in Oakland so I'm actually a Golden State fan. God damn you s are dumb.
sure you do. might be time for your meds again mavfan.
He is a mother er!
Pretty soon if he doesn't realize that he'll be calling the Ambalamp.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
