Blazers ahead of Lakers in Hollinger's Power Rankings

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
It seems to put a heavy weighting on the last 10/25 games, and the Lakers have been struggling lately.
 
Minstrel said:
It seems to put a heavy weighting on the last 10/25 games, and the Lakers have been struggling lately.
Click to expand...

well, we all knew this was coming with their easy schedule in the start of the year. :cheers:
 
Yep! The Portland Trail Blazers are definitely better than the Los Angeles Lakers. Yep, no doubt about that.

This guy seems to really know his stuff. It's such a fresh new approach to logic.

Tell me, has this guy done anything else of note? He seems like he's really got it all together.

Hold on, I've just googled him. What's this "PER" thing?
 
OddEnormous said:
Yep! The Portland Trail Blazers are definitely better than the Los Angeles Lakers. Yep, no doubt about that.

This guy seems to really know his stuff. It's such a fresh new approach to logic.

Tell me, has this guy done anything else of note? He seems like he's really got it all together.

Hold on, I've just googled him. What's this "PER" thing?
Click to expand...

I'm always a little saddened when people are afraid of mathematics and statistics.
 
Nikolokolus said:
Who said anything about standings? The Lakers were playing great in the first half of the season and lately they've been very mediocre.

Power Rankings = "who's hot, who's not?" and it gets calculated by a formula not some subjective 'gut feeling' like Mark Stein.
Click to expand...

Problems With PER

PER largely measures offensive performance. Hollinger freely admits that two of the defensive statistics it incorporates -- blocks and steals -- can produce a distorted picture of a player's value and that PER is not a reliable measure of a player's defensive acumen. For example, Bruce Bowen, widely regarded as one of the best defenders in the NBA (at least through the 2006-07 season), has routinely posted single-digit PERs.

"Bear in mind that this rating is not the final, once-and-for-all answer for a player's accomplishments during the season. This is especially true for players such as Bruce Bowen and Trenton Hassell who are defensive specialists but don't get many blocks or steals."

Neither PER nor per-game statistics take into account such intangible elements as competitive drive, leadership, durability, conditioning, or hustle, largely because there is no real way to quantitatively measure these things, which are often based on opinion.

Why do you hate John Hollinger?
 
OddEnormous said:
Perfect!

Would you like to bet $250 on the Lakers v Blazers series with me?

I'll take LA.
Click to expand...

Why would I want to do that? I'm sorry you don't understand the point of his rankings, but complaining about what he does, or mocking it, when you don't understand it doesn't make much sense to me.
 
Nikolokolus said:
WPower Rankings = "who's hot, who's not?" and it gets calculated by a formula not some subjective 'gut feeling' like Mark Stein.
Click to expand...

That's some formula.

Would you like to bet $250 on the Blazers Lakers series?

I'm going with Los Angleles.
 
RR7 said:
Why would I want to do that? I'm sorry you don't understand the point of his rankings, but complaining about what he does, or mocking it, when you don't understand it doesn't make much sense to me.
Click to expand...


I do understand power rankings. They are worthless. Just like PER.

I can tell you the Lakers are playing badly right now, and I don't need John Hollinger to tell me this. I was somehow able to come to this conclusion on my own.
 
OddEnormous said:
I do understand power rankings. They are worthless. Just like PER.

I can tell you the Lakers are playing badly right now, and I don't need John Hollinger to tell me this. I was somehow able to come to this conclusion on my own.
Click to expand...

:rant:
 
OddEnormous said:
That's some formula.

Would you like to bet $250 on the Blazers Lakers series?

I'm going with Los Angleles.
Click to expand...

Well, if you look at the difference in the two team's "power ranking" it's measured in hudredths of a point which pretty much makes it neglibible and the Lakers are guaranteed home-court which is far more important in determining success in the playoffs.

I just don't get the hostility; the ranking system is not some kind of playoff predictor. :dunno:
 
Nikolokolus said:
Well, if you look at the difference in the two team's "power ranking" it's measured in hudredths of a point which pretty much makes it neglibible and the Lakers are guaranteed home-court which is far more important in determining success in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

How did they get home court?
 
OddEnormous said:
Calling something worthless is not a worthless endevor.
Click to expand...

Please provide a better, non-subjective tool for comparing players currently, or how a player has progressed over time.

Nobody (that actually understands it) says that PER is perfect and the be-all-end-all stat. If you have something that is non-subjective and perfect, or even better than PER, please provide it so we can start using it.

Thanks.
 
blazerboy30 said:
Please provide a better, non-subjective tool for comparing players currently, or how a player has progressed over time.

Nobody (that actually understands it) says that PER is perfect and the be-all-end-all stat. If you have something that is non-subjective and perfect, or even better than PER, please provide it so we can start using it.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Why do I have to provide something better?

I think Journey sucks. I don't have to be better at drums, bass, guitar and singing to come that that conclusion.

Keep on sucking PER all night long if you want. It's flawed from the word go.
 
Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it's worthless.
 
Not sure why this "Odd E" guy is so riled up. I'm certain that over 90% of the members on this board don't believe the Blazers are actually better than the Lakers. KS posted a link that was interesting. It's not like every one on here agrees. Relax.
 
OddEnormous said:
Why do I have to provide something better?

I think Journey sucks. I don't have to be better at drums, bass, guitar and singing to come that that conclusion.

Keep on sucking PER all night long if you want. It's flawed from the word go.
Click to expand...

You are using relative terms like "sucks" and "worthless".

If you want to use relative terms to describe a statistical analysis, then you have to provide a statistical, non-subjective baseline.
 
The Professional Fan said:
Not sure why this "Odd E" guy is so riled up. I'm certain that over 90% of the members on this board don't believe the Blazers are actually better than the Lakers. KS posted a link that was interesting. It's not like every one on here agrees. Relax.
Click to expand...

And the link doesn't claim the Blazers are better than then Lakers. It's claiming that the Blazers are playing better than the Lakers at this point in time, which is far from controversial.

This has Hollinger's calculation of relative team strength:

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/playoffodds
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sinobas
power rankings
Replies
13
Views
1K
magnifier661
magnifier661
magnifier661
Hollinger Power Rankings
2 3
Replies
67
Views
6K
maxiep
maxiep
magnifier661
Blazers #4 in Hollinger Power rankings
Replies
10
Views
965
handiman
handiman
KingSpeed
3rd in Hollinger's Rankings
Replies
0
Views
322
KingSpeed
KingSpeed
KingSpeed
LOL! Blazers lose 5 straight and still rank higher than lowly Grizzlies and mediocre Rockets
Replies
7
Views
543
Boob-No-More
Boob-No-More

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top