Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Sunday, December 21, 2014

2003-2004 Team Rankings

2003-2004 End of season Offensive ranking:

RNK	TEAM	Poss/G	eFG%	pPTS
1 DAL 92.8 .495 113.3
2 SAC 92.4 .507 111.2
3 LAL 90.5 .481 108.5
4 SEA 89.7 .501 108.3
5 MIL 90.7 .477 108.1
6 MIN 88.3 .486 107.0
7 MEM 90.4 .479 107.0
8 IND 86.3 .471 105.8
9 DEN 92.0 .467 105.7
10 GSW 88.4 .475 105.5
11 SAS 86.9 .473 105.3
12 POR 86.2 .478 105.3
13 LAC 90.7 .453 104.5
14 BOS 91.2 .486 104.4
15 UTA 85.1 .456 104.2
16 DET 86.6 .461 104.0
17 ORL 90.5 .461 104.0
18 NOR 88.4 .460 103.8
19 MIA 87.0 .463 103.7
20 PHO 91.5 .475 102.9
21 CLE 90.4 .451 102.8
22 ATL 90.5 .465 102.5
23 NJN 88.1 .471 102.4
24 NYK 89.8 .474 102.4
25 HOU 87.7 .484 102.4
26 PHI 87.0 .456 101.2
27 WAS 90.8 .454 101.1
28 TOR 86.6 .454 98.6
29 CHI 91.3 .446 98.3

[pPTS is points scored per 100 possessions. This accounts for the team’s pace & is a better measure than points/game. For example, Indiana only scores 91.4 PPG, good enough for 20th in the league. However since their offense & defense slows down the game, it gives both teams a less chances to score. However accounting for pace, their offense is ranked 8th. eFG% is FG% with a bonus for 3 pointers (since they net more points). This is a better measure than FG%. For example if a player shoots 4-9 from inside the arc, that’s only about league average, and he gets 8 points. However if all of those are from three, it’s considered excellent shooting, and he gets 12 points.]

Dallas has taken the top spot, due to the plummeting Kings. Nearly two months ago (2/24), I ran this kind of comparison before, and the Kings had 114pPTs. Since then they’ve dropped almost 3pPts. The question is were they playing over their heads early on in the year, or are they suffering from trying to work Chris Webber back into the mix?

Also at that time, Orlando was still in the top half offensively (11th), but since McGrady’s injury, they’ve dropped to 17th. With their record being so horrbily bad, I would imagine it was their defense that was pitiful. Maybe if they could pick up a defensive force in the draft, they can have a quick turnaround for next year. That is if T-Mac is still around.

2003-2004 End of season Defensive ranking:

RNK	TEAM	Poss/G	oeFG%	opPTS
1 SAS 86.9 .433 97.0
2 DET 86.6 .441 97.3
3 IND 86.3 .459 99.2
4 NJN 88.1 .460 99.6
5 HOU 87.7 .447 100.4
6 MIN 88.3 .444 100.8
7 TOR 86.6 .449 102.1
8 MIA 87.0 .463 103.1
9 NOR 88.4 .476 104.0
10 NYK 89.8 .461 104.0
11 PHI 87.0 .467 104.0
12 LAL 90.5 .471 104.2
13 MEM 90.4 .465 104.3
14 DEN 92.0 .481 104.5
15 CHI 91.3 .469 105.2
16 UTA 85.1 .468 105.6
17 CLE 90.4 .469 105.7
18 SAC 92.4 .483 105.8
19 BOS 91.2 .479 106.0
20 GSW 88.4 .476 106.3
21 POR 86.2 .482 106.8
22 MIL 90.7 .485 107.0
23 PHO 91.5 .482 107.0
24 WAS 90.8 .486 107.3
25 ATL 90.5 .476 107.6
26 DAL 92.8 .498 108.6
27 SEA 89.7 .487 109.0
28 LAC 90.7 .494 109.6
29 ORL 90.5 .502 111.7

Well there is Orlando, dead last in defense, just as I predicted above. The Spurs take home the crown for best defensive team, with the Pistons barely behind. The West has the top 5 offensive teams, but the East has 3 of the top 4 defensive teams. Even though they are second & third in defense, I have picked the Pacers to win the East because their offense is 8th, as opposed to the Pistons who sit at 16th.

Knicks Related
There is one thing I can’t explain, and that is the Knicks’ ranking in the top 10 in defense. The Knicks’ defense has looked pitiful at times, but according to these numbers, it’s their offense that is the weaker of the two. To make matters more confounding, their opponents eFG% is a lowly .461, good enough for 8th in the league.
Breaking it down to their players, of their starters 2 are known as weak defenders (Nazr & T.Thomas). Only Kurt Thomas is regarded as a good defender. Thomas is a good man to man defender, but not necessarily a good weak side helper. Anderson is probably a better defender than Houston, but he’s not good enough to propel the Knicks single-handedly to the top 10. Mutombo is a good (weak side) defender but has seen little playing time this second half.

The Knicks don’t create many turnovers (23rd in the league), and are about league average in blocked shots (16th). They are one of the worst teams in sending their opponents to the line (behind only Utah & the Bulls). Really the only indication of them having a good defense is the low eFG%. Maybe the Knicks individual players’ defensive reputation is lower than their actual performance? One explanation of this could be their lacking players who perform well in traditional defensive measurements (STL, BLK, etc.). In any case I’m pleasantly surprised with this revelation.