Reply With Quote
Unless you're Hollinger...i think it's his favorite single stat...
Having a low margin of victory makes your team better when it matters. The team will know how to play under pressure and not crack like the Celtics did tonight.
Unless you're Hollinger...i think it's his favorite single stat...
it's irrelevant to me..
our record in close games speaks for itself, it's not luck, we know how to close games out..
if only we knew how to keep leads though..
Wrong......
If you lose by 20 then win by 22, guess what your average margin of victory is?
It's a direct measure of offensive output vs defensive output. Taken as an average over time, it's a very telling stat.
It would be if the compe ion would be about the same for said period of time. The reality is that this league is all about 6 or 7 excellent/real good teams, and the average to bad teams trailing behind... It also doesn't take into account things like lineups changes due to injury/foul trouble.Wrong......
If you lose by 20 then win by 22, guess what your average margin of victory is?
It's a direct measure of offensive output vs defensive output. Taken as an average over time, it's a very telling stat.
The reality is that at end of games it all comes down to execution and defense. We've been pretty good at that this season. I would rather blow out teams more often, but if that can't be had, then I'll take the second best thing: just win the game.
It's not a meaningless stat at all.
Especially since you love to bring it up all the time?
3 of the last 4 Championship teams lead the league in scoring margin, and the 4th was Miami so
I don't believe the Spurs lead the league in margin of victory before the RRT in any of the years they won it... I'd like to be proven otherwise...3 of the last 4 Championship teams lead the league in scoring margin, and the 4th was Miami so
Absolutely not.
More often than not the NBA champ has the best margin of victory stat.
Straight from Hollinger:
WINNING CLOSE GAMES
Graham (New Haven): Your formula has allowances only for strength of schedule and winning margin. However, one key component to being a good NBA team is the ability to win close games. Please include something useful in your formula (like winning percentage).
HOLLINGER: This is commonly thought to be true, but it isn't.
The real mark of a team is its record in games that aren't close -- like Phoenix's evisceration of Washington last night.
Teams' records in close games tends to vary wildly from year to year with no rhyme or reason, even when their personnel and talent level remain the same. Which suggests that it isn't much of an "ability" at all, but subject heavily to the whims of chance.
This is one of the worst Spurs teams ever in the Duncan era for scoring margin.
The stat is important. But unlike other sports, basketball is a game where real clutch performances occur. In othe sports, "clutch" performances are usually just luck or statistical flucuation.
Another factor is the age of a team.
A young team is more likely to rack up big margins of victories, while a veteran team like the Spurs will pace themselves for the playoffs.
Also, early season injuries hurt the scoring margin, but have nothing to do with how good the Spurs are now or will be come playoff time.
I would say that the Spurs reletively low scoring margin indicates three things:
1) they are not a dominant team, but good enough to win the NBA le.
2) they are a clutch team
3) they are pacing themselves for the playoffs
exactly...
Scoring margin means everything for the Spurs, because it reflects how well they are playing defense night in and night out.
What you just posted makes no sense whatsoever... try again please.
ask golden state if margin of victory matters. they lost heart breakers at home by last possession shots. for them the inability to close out makes them mediocre and they will remain so until they can close it out. the moment the spurs made it a two possession game it was over. the spurs understand how to play out games calmly so they don't give the games away.
Agree.3 of the last 4 Championship teams lead the league in scoring margin, and the 4th was Miami so
Point differential has proven to be a fairly solid indicator of potential championship success. While it's not 100% accurate, it does have at least a 50% accuracy rate.
http://armchairgm.wikia.com/NBA_Poin...ost_Power_Stat
Most recently the 97-98 Bulls, 98-99 Spurs, 99-00 Lakers, 04-05 Spurs, and 06-07 Spurs all won the NBA le and the point differential crown in the same season.
Avg W margin is a good stat for me, IIRC the Spurs championship teams were pretty good there.
Also, I use road record. eg, look here to see how all the top teams have solid road records.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/standi...Type=standings
ime, a team with good overall record, but mediocre road record isn't to be feared in the playoffs.
It makes complete sense, you just need to work harder at reading the information. As the Hollinger quote you posted states, scoring margin doesn't have to do with close games because it's measured over a long period of time and the ability to win close games is flukey. Like someone else mentioned, if you play two games, win one by 20 and lose the next by 20 your scoring margin is zero. The Spurs' scoring margin goes up when they are playing good defense every game, because stopping someone from making a basket is just as good as making one yourself, and it's more important for a team that can go cold from the field.
That's an oxymoron. A 50% accuracy rate is a coin toss...
What you're referring to is called Opponent FG%. If the Spurs win a game 87-80 vs winning another game 120-110, guess which game did the Spurs play better defense in? But the scoring differential is better on the high scoring game... Scoring differential is a benchmark of both offense AND defense, but it does not take into account way too many factors to make it anywhere near a reliable stat...
No, what I'm referring to is called scoring margin, which is why I posted in the thread in the first place. You've made it painfully clear that you don't understand it, but if you need to rationalize about it to make yourself feel better about the Spurs, be my guest.
The Spurs' defense this year has NOT consistently created scoring opportunities on the other end, their sets have not consistently created scoring opportunities inside, and their defense has not been able to consistently limit inside scoring by the opponents. They have shown an unusual ability to win close games, which covers for a mul ude of sins (and allows a top record despite being average in opponent FG%) but won't really mean anything when the playoffs roll around and they are playing good teams every night.
What I don't understand? That you take a stat over 82 games with a certain lineup that resembles nothing at all the lineup used in the playoffs and pretend to make a reading in that flawed stat?
Bingo! We can measure our defense pretty well with opponent FG% and we can determine from that stat that we're not playing defense as well as years past. Margin of victory is meaningless to measure defensive play. I gave you a clear example that you decided to ignore, but that clearly demonstrates the silliness of your proposition.
Just to add to this, today's game will show that we beat the Celtics by 6 points, stat-wise, even though it was a much closer game up to 1 minute to go. There has been games we took 15-20 point leads and ended up winning by 6-8, but they were not close at all.
You have to be careful when looking at just numbers...
Especially when you continue to try to use examples of a stat over the course of a game or less when it's been explained to you that it isn't used that way.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
