PDA

View Full Version : NBA Power Rankings--Top 10


MavKikiNYC
01-18-2004, 08:08 PM
NBA
Power Ratings
By division
Last Updated Sun Jan 18 07:30:53 EST 2004

Home Advantage = 3.4794



TeamRating v. Top 5 v. 6-10 v. 11-16
1. Sacramento (28-9) 106.39 4-1 4-2 7-2
2. Indiana (31-11) 106.17 3-3 6-2 5-2
3. Minnesota (26-12) 105.62 3-2 4-4 5-3
4. LA Lakers (25-12) 104.33 2-3 6-3 5-3
5. Detroit (28-13) 104.11 1-4 4-2 5-3
6. San Antonio (26-14) 104.07 1-5 4-3 6-1
7. Houston (23-16) 103.06 3-4 1-4 4-5
8. Dallas (24-16) 103.05 4-5 4-1 6-4
9. Memphis (21-18) 101.94 2-6 5-2 2-5
10. New Jersey (21-17) 101.67 3-4 0-4 4-6

MightyToine
01-18-2004, 09:45 PM
Originally posted by: MavKikiNYC
NBA
Power Ratings
By division
Last Updated Sun Jan 18 07:30:53 EST 2004

Home Advantage = 3.4794



TeamRating v. Top 5 v. 6-10 v. 11-16
1. Sacramento (28-9) 106.39 4-1 4-2 7-2
2. Indiana (31-11) 106.17 3-3 6-2 5-2
3. Minnesota (26-12) 105.62 3-2 4-4 5-3
4. LA Lakers (25-12) 104.33 2-3 6-3 5-3
5. Detroit (28-13) 104.11 1-4 4-2 5-3
6. San Antonio (26-14) 104.07 1-5 4-3 6-1
7. Houston (23-16) 103.06 3-4 1-4 4-5
8. Dallas (24-16) 103.05 4-5 4-1 6-4
9. Memphis (21-18) 101.94 2-6 5-2 2-5
10. New Jersey (21-17) 101.67 3-4 0-4 4-6

Now explain to me why those Houston CROCKS are ahead of us in the rankings when they haven't beaten us since.....NEVER?? i/expressions/face-icon-small-mad.gif

Shaq Attack2
01-18-2004, 10:22 PM
Talk about terrible power rankings. Houston above the Mavs and Lakers below the Pacers?

LRB
01-19-2004, 02:18 AM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2
Talk about terrible power rankings. Houston above the Mavs and Lakers below the Pacers?

Well SA2 the Lakers aren't as good as the Pacers when Shaq, Kobe, and Malone are all out hurt. Now when they're healthy and playing it's a completely different story. But the Mavs should be about the Rockets because we have the better record overall and head to head.

MavKikiNYC
01-19-2004, 12:09 PM
RE Mavs v. Rox rankings--they're separated by .01 of a power ranking point. I think that their relative performance this year is pretty close, so I don't have a problem with this outcome at this point in the year.

Will be surprised and a bit disappointed if Mavs aren't able to ascend and separate from the Rox a bit, but disappointment is a definite possibility for Mavs fans this year.

Hope they can keep gaining momentum for now though.

WayOutWest
01-19-2004, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2
Talk about terrible power rankings. Houston above the Mavs and Lakers below the Pacers?

The Lakers are lucky to be where they are on the list. Right now the Lakers are like a super-duper SUV with 3 flat tires. They ain't going to do shyte until you fix the flats.

I'd change the rankings slightly at this point:

1. Sacramento (28-9) 106.39 4-1 4-2 7-2
2. Minnesota (26-12) 105.62 3-2 4-4 5-3
3. Indiana (31-11) 106.17 3-3 6-2 5-2
4. Detroit (28-13) 104.11 1-4 4-2 5-3
5. San Antonio (26-14) 104.07 1-5 4-3 6-1
6. LA Lakers (25-12) 104.33 2-3 6-3 5-3
7. Dallas (24-16) 103.05 4-5 4-1 6-4
8. Houston (23-16) 103.06 3-4 1-4 4-5
9. Memphis (21-18) 101.94 2-6 5-2 2-5
10. New Jersey (21-17) 101.67 3-4 0-4 4-6

bernardos70
01-19-2004, 09:41 PM
That should change now with Memphis' win over Houston i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif

bernardos70
01-19-2004, 09:47 PM
Oh, and here's a more credible power-ranking:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerranking

MavKikiNYC
01-19-2004, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by: bernardos70
Oh, and here's a more credible power-ranking:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerranking

Power Rankings Description (http://teamrankings.com/description.php3)

I'm not sure that I'd call Stein's ratings more credible or not. Greenfield's are based on an algorithm, whereas Stern's appear to be based more on impression. I'll take them both for what they're worth.