Blazer Fanatic
Suspended
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2013
- Messages
- 4,282
- Likes
- 75
- Points
- 0
When I see a “power ranking” with OKC or GS in the top 3 (or Minnesota even in the top 10?!) and Portland not in the top 3, I assume the writer(s) are trolling. Rather than just say they are trolling, I wanted to provide some logic and support that shows it.
My theory is that when teams are accurately ranked, their ability to perform on the road and in B2B games on the road says more about their ability to win than any other factors. The counter to that is of course that the playoffs aren’t B2B games, but I still believe it has to be considered in order to draw fair comparisons. The reason to consider the B2B schedule is because it is significant even with less than half the season played.
Looking at the schedules compared to over-all record, it appears that some records should be worse, and others should be better all schedules being equal. I only looked at the teams above .500 (plus Miami and Indiana) to illustrated the B2B disparity, and then took that in to consideration when looking at the current standing.
Western Conference teams above .500 (+ Miami & Indian)
grey = extra info green = cake mode orange = hard red = just turble
It would seem obvious that playing a back-to-back has significant disadvantages: fatigue, lack of preparation time, travel. What appears to be the greatest variable is whether that 2nd game of a B2B is played on the road or at home. Over the past decade (give or take a few percent) in the 2nd of a B2B situation, teams win:
Road-Home: around 60% of the time
Home-Home: around 50% of the time
Home-Road: around 40% of the time
Road-Road: around 30% win of the time
Clearly, road B2Bs are significant, and B2Bs played at home, not so much.
If someone looked into the exact, current percentage, that would be interesting, but I just didn’t want to spend the time. Basically, a team should lose just about any B2B on the road, except to the worst teams. And teams, in general, win roughly the same as if it were not a B2B, if played at home.
Of course the primary factor for judging success is over-all record, but people want to make it more complicated with “last 10 games”, “strength of schedule”, and a number of other “factors”. I just look at road wins, B2Bs, and margin of victory.
The Spurs are a great team, but they definitely benefit from one of the easier schedules of +.500 teams, playing the fewest B2B road games of any Western Conference team (11, tied with Dallas). SA played 11 B2B games thus far (9-2) with 5 of those B2Bs on the road (4-1). Yes, that loss is from the Blazers. While the Spurs have a larger win margin, and a better record, it’s still debatable whether they are better than Portland given that the Minnesota loss Portland incurred on a 4-in-5 is really all that separates their records.
Conversely, what’s Dallas’ excuse? They only play 11 B2B games on the road and only 7 where both games of the B2B are on the road. That suggests to me that they are probably worse than their record suggests.
I’ve singled out OKC and GS, because there are an above .500 team with the easiest of schedules in terms of B2Bs, and have both been ranked ahead of Portland for one reason or another despite losing every game versus Portland.
Portland has and Average Win Margin (AWM), or differential, of +6.19
● 8-2 in back to back games (AWM: +5.60)
● 4-2 in back to back games (AWM: +0.67) where the other team did not play the 2nd of a back to back
● 0-1 in the 2nd game of the 2nd back to back (4 games 5 nights, both on the road)
Most significant, Portland is 5-1 on road B2Bs, with their sole loss to Minn, a virtual guaranteed loss by virtue of it being the 4th road games in 5 nights.
OKC has an AWM of +7.00
● 2-3 in back to back games, the opponent always had a day or more off (AWM: +5.00 or +0.50 excluding the 23 point blowout of Boston @ OKC)
● OKC will play 4 games in 5 nights only one time this season, and only 1 B2B game is on the road
Most significant, OKC is 1-2 on road B2Bs.
GS has an AWM of +4.92 on the season
● 2-5 in back to back games (AWM: -3.14)
● 2-4 in back to back games (AWM: -0.26) where the other team did not play the 2nd of a back to back
● GS will play 4 games in 5 nights only one time this season, and only 1 B2B game is on the road
● GS played 7 road game in 11 nights and 2 back to backs vs ATL and BKL (1-1)
Most significant, GS is 2-4 on road B2Bs.
What should be a clear disadvantage to the Blazers is glaring endorsement for how much better the Blazers have been than both OKC and GS - playing and winning more road, and B2B road games. Portland also has 3 “guaranteed” losses on the schedule, the 3 games that end on the road on a 4 game in 5 night road stretch. Phoenix is the only other team that has 2 of those type game scheduled (with every game on the road), and everyone else above .500 has zero. The Blazers have already racked up 1 of those losses in Minnesota, and will play another against OKC on this next road trip. While it won’t cost Portland a playoff spot this season, it could very well cost them the best record in West, if not home-court advantage.
Considering all this, and that Portland has a better record than every team in the NBA, save SAS and IND, anyone “ranking” Portland outside of the top 3 up to this point is straight up trolling - as is anyone who has GS ranked in the top 3. Top 2? Someone really needs clicks.
My theory is that when teams are accurately ranked, their ability to perform on the road and in B2B games on the road says more about their ability to win than any other factors. The counter to that is of course that the playoffs aren’t B2B games, but I still believe it has to be considered in order to draw fair comparisons. The reason to consider the B2B schedule is because it is significant even with less than half the season played.
Looking at the schedules compared to over-all record, it appears that some records should be worse, and others should be better all schedules being equal. I only looked at the teams above .500 (plus Miami and Indiana) to illustrated the B2B disparity, and then took that in to consideration when looking at the current standing.
Western Conference teams above .500 (+ Miami & Indian)
grey = extra info green = cake mode orange = hard red = just turble
It would seem obvious that playing a back-to-back has significant disadvantages: fatigue, lack of preparation time, travel. What appears to be the greatest variable is whether that 2nd game of a B2B is played on the road or at home. Over the past decade (give or take a few percent) in the 2nd of a B2B situation, teams win:
Road-Home: around 60% of the time
Home-Home: around 50% of the time
Home-Road: around 40% of the time
Road-Road: around 30% win of the time
Clearly, road B2Bs are significant, and B2Bs played at home, not so much.
If someone looked into the exact, current percentage, that would be interesting, but I just didn’t want to spend the time. Basically, a team should lose just about any B2B on the road, except to the worst teams. And teams, in general, win roughly the same as if it were not a B2B, if played at home.
Of course the primary factor for judging success is over-all record, but people want to make it more complicated with “last 10 games”, “strength of schedule”, and a number of other “factors”. I just look at road wins, B2Bs, and margin of victory.
The Spurs are a great team, but they definitely benefit from one of the easier schedules of +.500 teams, playing the fewest B2B road games of any Western Conference team (11, tied with Dallas). SA played 11 B2B games thus far (9-2) with 5 of those B2Bs on the road (4-1). Yes, that loss is from the Blazers. While the Spurs have a larger win margin, and a better record, it’s still debatable whether they are better than Portland given that the Minnesota loss Portland incurred on a 4-in-5 is really all that separates their records.
Conversely, what’s Dallas’ excuse? They only play 11 B2B games on the road and only 7 where both games of the B2B are on the road. That suggests to me that they are probably worse than their record suggests.
I’ve singled out OKC and GS, because there are an above .500 team with the easiest of schedules in terms of B2Bs, and have both been ranked ahead of Portland for one reason or another despite losing every game versus Portland.
Portland has and Average Win Margin (AWM), or differential, of +6.19
● 8-2 in back to back games (AWM: +5.60)
● 4-2 in back to back games (AWM: +0.67) where the other team did not play the 2nd of a back to back
● 0-1 in the 2nd game of the 2nd back to back (4 games 5 nights, both on the road)
Most significant, Portland is 5-1 on road B2Bs, with their sole loss to Minn, a virtual guaranteed loss by virtue of it being the 4th road games in 5 nights.
OKC has an AWM of +7.00
● 2-3 in back to back games, the opponent always had a day or more off (AWM: +5.00 or +0.50 excluding the 23 point blowout of Boston @ OKC)
● OKC will play 4 games in 5 nights only one time this season, and only 1 B2B game is on the road
Most significant, OKC is 1-2 on road B2Bs.
GS has an AWM of +4.92 on the season
● 2-5 in back to back games (AWM: -3.14)
● 2-4 in back to back games (AWM: -0.26) where the other team did not play the 2nd of a back to back
● GS will play 4 games in 5 nights only one time this season, and only 1 B2B game is on the road
● GS played 7 road game in 11 nights and 2 back to backs vs ATL and BKL (1-1)
Most significant, GS is 2-4 on road B2Bs.
What should be a clear disadvantage to the Blazers is glaring endorsement for how much better the Blazers have been than both OKC and GS - playing and winning more road, and B2B road games. Portland also has 3 “guaranteed” losses on the schedule, the 3 games that end on the road on a 4 game in 5 night road stretch. Phoenix is the only other team that has 2 of those type game scheduled (with every game on the road), and everyone else above .500 has zero. The Blazers have already racked up 1 of those losses in Minnesota, and will play another against OKC on this next road trip. While it won’t cost Portland a playoff spot this season, it could very well cost them the best record in West, if not home-court advantage.
Considering all this, and that Portland has a better record than every team in the NBA, save SAS and IND, anyone “ranking” Portland outside of the top 3 up to this point is straight up trolling - as is anyone who has GS ranked in the top 3. Top 2? Someone really needs clicks.
