Joined: 13 Oct 2005 Posts: 374 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject: The Finals
Okay, since we now know the two participants, here's a Finals poll/thread. Below is a little power ranking I cooked up from the regular-season numbers using Pyth and Ed's Four Factors regression. Stats from the 2nd half are weighted twice as heavily (though playoff stats aren't included), and the resulting "true winning %" is adjusted to .500 SOS. Below that are each team's odds of winning one game at home and away, using Dean's modified log5 method. Finally, at the bottom are the odds of each team winning the series overall (and also in how many games), thanks to this cool piece of code somebody wrote for the baseball playoffs. According to the model, San Antonio has an 82% probability of winning this series, and the most likely outcome (25.5%) is Spurs in 6.
Joined: 03 Jan 2005 Posts: 671 Location: Washington, DC
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:04 pm Post subject:
I concur that the Spurs win, and I think it'll be in 5 or 6 games. Both teams are excellent on the defensive end, but the Spurs have the better offense. _________________ My blog
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1521 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 10:02 am Post subject:
The Cavs' point differential for these playoffs is +4.1, while for the Spurs it's +3.4 . Perhaps SA has knocked off tougher opponents -- OK, they have -- but Den/Phx/Uta isn't like a different league than Was/NJ/Det. In the same number of games (16), SA has PythEx of 10.0, Cle 10.5 .
Has SA's schedule been 1/2 win tougher? Probably. Both teams have won 4 of their last 5 games. Was Utah tougher than Detroit?
Several Cavs players have underperformed up to now. A couple of the Spurs have. I say Cle has the momentum. Just to optimize my chance of winning this poll, I pick the Cavs in 7. _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
What if SA wins in six? Would you say that something is wrong? that you must have "overspecificated" more than just Pyth and points diff? That you maybe forgot conference strenght of squedule, matchup diff., or who knows what?
Joined: 13 Oct 2005 Posts: 374 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 10:54 am Post subject:
Mike, I think you're vastly overestimating Cleveland's playoff SOS if you think the two teams' paths have been anything close to each other in terms of difficulty. Running the +/-, an Arenas-less Wizards team is -10.8 pts per 48, which is the equivalent of a 12-win team over 82 games. New Jersey is a below-average team, and Detroit is not the same Pistons powerhouse we've seen the past few seasons. By contrast, Den/Phx/Uta is a significantly tougher path -- all three are above average (compared to only Detroit for CLE's path), and Phoenix was one of the very best teams in the entire league. Plus, San Antonio's SOS was .505 during the regular season, Cleveland's was .493, and the "true" SOS gap is probably even wider because of the difference in conference strength. And SA still had 12 more pyth wins during the season. If Cleveland wins this series, my faith in point differential + SOS for rating systems might be a tad... shaken.
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1521 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:10 am Post subject:
davis21wylie2121 wrote:
...Arenas-less Wizards team is ... the equivalent of a 12-win team... New Jersey is a below-average team, and Detroit is not the same Pistons powerhouse we've seen the past few seasons. ..
Agree on NJ and Was. Det was the eastern powerhouse, until Cle took them 4 straight. The Cavs relaxed vs Was, got it together vs NJ, and took no quarter from Det. That's why I say they have 'momentum'.
SOS obviously takes into account one's conference, since that's what makes SA's schedule tougher. Still, that's the regular season. Haven't we been discussing all year, "What's up with LeBron?" He just coasted thru the season -- and thru part of these playoffs -- until his team needed the 100% version.
We haven't seen much from Hughes, Gooden, Marshall. These guys can play. If they get going, look out. Meanwhile, Ginobili's been inconsistent; Parker more off than on.
Anyway, I didn't say I actually expect Cleveland to win. Just that the poll was 14:1 for SA, and your figures (based on Reg Sea.) are more like 5:1.
So I'm playing the odds, as if there were a payoff based on who is betting on whom. _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 13 Oct 2005 Posts: 374 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:17 am Post subject:
I understand -- just playing a little Devil's Advocate.
Out of curiosity... using eWins, how much would it have changed Cleveland's regular season winning percentage if LBJ played all year long like he did vs. Detroit (the 100% LeBron)? Would it push CLE's expected W% past San Antonio's 78% regular season pyth?
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1521 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:43 am Post subject:
Well, we saw all shades of LeBron vs Detroit. Here are the Finals lineups ranked by eW produced to date. I've included eW per 200 minutes (5 x 40 min, 6 x 33mpg ) and per36 rates relative to their individual series'/opponents.
Spurs may go bigger vs Z: Elson/Oberto may play >33 mpg total. Do they have an answer for Mr. Gibson and his 64% shooting? _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1521 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:57 am Post subject:
Series by series breakdown for Finals participants. Both Duncan and LeBron have gotten stronger by the series. T-Rates are not fully adjusted for opponent strength, so e200 may be the better measure of up/down-ness.
The first columns after the names are for the whole playoffs to date.
DW21: We can't just transplant LeBron's rates (vs Det) to the season. From this one series, we only know what he does when his teammates do less. Since all their series rates are relative to the Pistons', I guess we could say in 82 games vs Detroit, at these rates the Cavs would be 53-29 (and Det would be 29-53). Since Det won 53 this year, ....?
Scary good? _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
DW21 I am glad to see these numbers. Calls for this type of research were made fairly recently and you have knitted together the tools and data ably. Given the early discussion I think this could go further.
Spurs 82% chance of winning based 100% on regular season. What would it be under 50% regular season and 50% SOS adjusted playoffs? What were the expected win % of past 5 Finals or more? What were the results?
Which regular/playoff weight set gives best fit? If you looked at 20 years and adjusted the prediction to better fit the actual at a minimum you could have an interesting to talk about second hypothesis. Based on the past and the expected win%s and the actual results should it be rare that a team gets less than a 1/3rd chance to win and do the Cavs fall in that category by the numbers?
(And then going beyond the numbers there is still whether subjectively should they be pulled out or lowered there based on position matchups, head to head or whatever.)
Last edited by Mark on Tue Jun 05, 2007 7:51 pm; edited 4 times in total
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1521 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject:
It seems there have been a number of playoff series, Finals and otherwise, in which a team has gone down 0-2 and come back to win 4 straight. Cavs this year vs Det. Mia vs Dal last year. Por vs Phl in '77; and a few in between.
If the eventual winner had gone down 0-3, would it have not been possible to come up with the 4 straight wins? Would the psychological burden have made all the difference?
Maybe SA has 'proved' they are the better team by taking 3 straight. Conversely, any team can beat any team once, and occasionally twice. But never 3 times?
When the Mavs were up 2-0 last year, on top of being the favorites going in, wasn't it a foregone conclusion that they'd win it? Didn't Miami come up with something, just enough, each of the next 4 games?
So what's the critical, profound difference between coming back from 0-2 or from 0-3? Just that it hasn't yet been done (in the NBA)? _________________ 40% of all statistics are wrong.
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1521 Location: Delphi, Indiana
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 1:15 pm Post subject:
It's nice that a scoring machine won mvp in this scoring-deprived Finals. But without Parker, the Spurs still win -- or have a very good chance. Without Duncan? I don't think so.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
