Minny announcers baffled on our success

I remembered watching the telecast during the game and the Minny announcers questioned how in the hell are we 2 games over .500. They talked about our lackluster bench and low ranks in most the major categories. After they said that, I was trying to think on what the difference was? I mean they really had a point.

So I looked up some of the statistical numbers so far this season.

http://hoopdata.com/teamadvancedstats.aspx

We are 25th on pace, 14th on offensive efficiency, 7th worst on defensive efficiency, 23rd on difference, 16th on TS%, 22nd on effeciency, and 17th on PER.

Looking at these numbers, we have no real business being were we are, except I watched the games and realized something quite interesting. We aren't blowing out teams. We win by low margins... But when we lose, we lose by large margins. The numbers are skew'd because the win/loss ratio aren't measured by the performance of all games. It's measured on a "Per Win/ Per loss" ratio.

We are 9-2 on games decided by 6 or less. The games over 6, we are 9-14. That puts a huge hit on the statistical numbers. 9 of our wins were by 6 or less. The 9 other games won by larger than 6. We have only 1 loss when decided by 6 or less; but have 14 losses by more than 6.

In summary, we need to close out teams and win by larger margins. I think our defense needs to step up, but more importantly, the bench d needs to improve. I think as the season progresses, our statistical numbers will average out and explain our record easier.

 

I was pretty impressed with their announcers to be honest.

 

I actually liked their announcers. They weren't hard to watch at all. They were honest and to the point. They had some homer moments, but nothing that was annoying. I may watch them again when we play them. It was fun listening to their perspective.

 

They kept expressing amazement about Nic Batum, which made me laugh.

 

This reminds me of that scene in Zoolander.

[video=youtube;CV_hDyfmEw4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV_hDyfmEw4[/video]

 

Great post. But we only have 15 losses so your win-loss stat is off. Are we then 9-13 in games decide by more than 6?

 

No it's right I believe. 9-14 on games decided by more than 6 and 9-1 on games decided by 6 or less.

 

Without a bench, if Portland's starters aren't all firing on all cylinders your gonna have a bad time. I mean really, really bad blowout losses. But Stotts is reluctant to throw in the bench (because it's a surefire admission of defeat). Coach would rather take a 25% chance on a comeback with our starters than a 2% chance of a comeback with our bench.

But if our starters are doing well, their cumulative production outstrips the opponent's starters and their bench to win a squeaker.

So Portland wins a lot of close ones and loses a lot of blowouts.

 

And as the season wears on those numbers will even out - we're not going to always be on the winning end of those squeakers.

 

You sound smart and your definition makes a ton of sense. I'm curious to see the production of our starters against the opposition. I have a feeling that the numbers are staggering.

 

The strength of schedule has a lot to do with it. We've played (and beaten) mostly average to below average teams. This month will be the real test.

 

I beg to differ. We have 18 wins. Out of those 18 wins, 10 of those wins are on teams with .500 or above record.

 

Thanks! It's just my guess. It would also explain why our team doesn't rank well in many stats. The coach leaves the starters in when they are sucking because even a sucking Hickson is still better than Jeffries. So the nights where Hickson only grabs 6 boards drags down his PER/etc.

There's nowhere to hide if you're a starter and you feel sick or tired or just not shooting well or you've got a tough matchup for your skill set. Suck it up and play.

 

I stand corrected. I didn't look into it, it just seems like our early schedule was loaded with cupcakes.

 

Yeah it's a little crazy until I actually looked it up.

We have wins against: NY, Houston X2, Chicago, Minny x2, SAS, Denver, Philly, and Memphis.

 

But even still, some of those "above .500" teams are fairly average. Opening night against LAL was a big win because everyone expected LAL to be a contender and for us to be among the worst, and they don't even factor in as an above .500 team. OT wins against HOU were solid, but HOU didn't have a reputation as a great team - I see them as a fairly average winning team. Win over Rose-less CHI - good win, but still there's really only one great team in the East and it's not CHI. Solid win over the Spurs. Good win over DEN, but again...kinda an average winning team like HOU. And then great wins over NYK and MEM missing key players...and I think NYK is fools gold.

This isn't to belittle what we've achieved - they've exceeded my expectations. But there are a lot of teams that are floundering this year. I guess any win with this roster is impressive, but I'm not buying into the idea that we're feasting on wins against great teams. When we beat MIA, OKC, LAC, GSW and maybe win against full-strength MEM and NYK, or add another against a full-strength SAS then maybe I'll believe it. But the way I see it we're exceeding expectations while much of the league isn't living up to their own expectations. And at some point the ball is going to bounce the other way in those close games.

 

How does that explain the original question of our record being out of line with point differential? If we were just playing cupcakes, we should have a great point differential along with the winning record.

 

I don't know if you don't remember but out of those wins; we missed some key players too. Injuries are part of the game. A winning team is still a winning team. I didn't even factor the lakers in my 10 game wins since they aren't a .500 team either. And we beat sas when they were at full strength.

 

Yeah yeah, I know. I just think there's a lot of mediocrity in the NBA right now - we're much better than expected (but still mediocre) and many teams are much worse than expected. Maybe this is what parity looks like?
Still, I think that even though right now we're doing well in close games we can't bank on that being the case all season long.