Behold, the idiocy that is John Hollinger

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I have to admit, the idea of getting Roddy more minutes at the expense of Butler has in fact crossed my mind.

The idea of packaging Butler/Damp instead of Beaubois/Damp this summer has crossed my mind...


(100% dependent on the return, of course - both talent-wise and position-wise...)

[rabbitproof]

Iggy/Dalembert?

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Iggy/Dalembert?

Sure, since we're off-topic anyway...

(and especially since I'm not sure if Damp will ever be 100% again...)

[FreshJive]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I have to admit, the idea of getting Roddy more minutes at the expense of Butler has in fact crossed my mind.

I posted this yesterday in KG's Terry thread. Hollinger is stealing my sh*t (or he looks at his own PER).

[Dirkadirkastan]

Between the Mavs' playoff hopes and Hollinger's reputation, only one will survive beyond May 10th.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by FreshJive

I posted this yesterday in KG's Terry thread. Hollinger is stealing my sh*t (or he looks at his own PER).

He is stealing from you, for which he must be punished. But I digress...

Think about this for a moment:

A two-headed center.
A three forward rotation of Nowitzki, Marion and Butler.
A three guard rotation of Kidd, Beaubois and Terry.

The real beauty of that is that there is only one truly weak link defensively (Terry). Beaubois is talented enough to cover the best opposing guard, whether he be quick or long. With his wingspan, there are very few SGs he can't handle. With his quickness, there are very few PGs he can't check (and if he can't, Kidd and Terry certainly can't). He provides the remedy to the one major weakness the Mavs perimeter defense has: quick PGs.

[FreshJive]

Punishment is a dancing badger avatar (although I don't get it) in place of his picture on all insider articles until we are bounced from the playoffs. And that's the 8 man rotation I would roll with.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by FreshJive

Punishment is a dancing badger avatar (although I don't get it) in place of his picture on all insider articles until we are bounced from the playoffs. And that's the 8 man rotation I would roll with.

I feel like I'm being mocked here, somehow.

[Underdog]

Huck Follinger

[LonghornDub]

The Hollinger Power Rankings continue to show their wherewithal, what with the Mavs crushing the Nuggets and all. Fourteenth best team in the league, indeed.

[Fidel]

Current Vegas odds to win it all this year. Which analysis should we trust here? That of a self entitled stats guru or that of a multi billion dollar buisiness?

Team Current
Cleveland 7/5
L.A. Lakers 7/5
Orlando 6/1
Dallas 7/1
Denver 7/1
Boston 7/1
Utah 8/1
Atlanta 12/1
Phoenix 15/1
San Anto 22/1
Portland 30/1
Oklahoma 40/1
Miami 50/1
Milwaukee 50/1
Charlotte 50/1

Edit: I also just noticed that this is very close to the self made powerrankings lor20 posted two weeks ago in this thread. Only a couple teams have switched places since then but the top 5 are exactly the same. Nice job lor.

[DubOverdose]

I love how we lost points in Hollinger's ranking with a 16pt win over a highly ranked (by Hollinger himself) rival.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by DubOverdose

I love how we lost points in Hollinger's ranking with a 16pt win over a highly ranked (by Hollinger himself) rival.

I love how the Mavs are ranked 8 spots below a team they went 2-1 against this season, beat by 16 last night, and are ahead of in the standings.

[dirno2000]

Originally Posted by DubOverdose

I love how we lost points in Hollinger's ranking with a 16pt win over a highly ranked (by Hollinger himself) rival.

Looks like the Magic win dropped off. We exchanged a 10 point road win against the top team in the league with a 16 point home win against the seventh ranked team.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Looks like the Magic win dropped off. We exchanged a 10 point road win against the top team in the league with a 16 point home win against the seventh ranked team.

I was wondering what win dropped off that would be big enough to outweigh this win. Does Hollinger's rankings take into account whether the game was home or away (at least with regards to recent wins)? I thought SOS was the only factor, which was measured on the basis of opponent winning percentage. Still seems kinda weird...

[rabbitproof]

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Looks like the Magic win dropped off. We exchanged a 10 point road win against the top team in the league with a 16 point home win against the seventh ranked team.

His proxy for 'recent' data (aka importance and relevance) is looking like a clear weakness in his algorithm.

[dirno2000]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

I was wondering what win dropped off that would be big enough to outweigh this win. Does Hollinger's rankings take into account whether the game was home or away (at least with regards to recent wins)? I thought SOS was the only factor, which was measured on the basis of opponent winning percentage. Still seems kinda weird...

Yes the formula adjusts scoring margin by 3.5 points based on home or away. So we actually replaced a 13.5 point Orlando win with a 12.5 point Denver win.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Fidel

Current Vegas odds to win it all this year. Which analysis should we trust here? That of a self entitled stats guru or that of a multi billion dollar buisiness?

Team Current
Cleveland 7/5
L.A. Lakers 7/5
Orlando 6/1
Dallas 7/1
Denver 7/1
Boston 7/1
Utah 8/1
Atlanta 12/1
Phoenix 15/1
San Anto 22/1
Portland 30/1
Oklahoma 40/1
Miami 50/1
Milwaukee 50/1
Charlotte 50/1

Edit: I also just noticed that this is very close to the self made powerrankings lor20 posted two weeks ago in this thread. Only a couple teams have switched places since then but the top 5 are exactly the same. Nice job lor.

You're right that it's interesting--revealing, even--to compare the take of people who are putting their money where their mouths are. However, note that the odds aren't a reflection of any sort of analysis by a multi-billion-dollar business. Rather, they simply reflect the collective opinion of the people who bet on such things.

[LonghornDub]

*edit* double post

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

You're right that it's interesting--revealing, even--to compare the take of people who are putting their money where their mouths are. However, note that the odds aren't a reflection of any sort of analysis by a multi-billion-dollar business. Rather, they simply reflect the collective opinion of the people who bet on such things.

Not exactly true. The odds certainly move to reflect the action on either side, but odds on "futures" bets never stray incredibly far from what they are initially set (and then later re-set) as by the handicappers. In that sense, they reflect both public opinion and the opinion of the professionals.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Yes the formula adjusts scoring margin by 3.5 points based on home or away. So we actually replaced a 13.5 point Orlando win with a 12.5 point Denver win.

Ah okay I hadn't ever heard about that adjustment, but it makes sense now.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Not exactly true. The odds certainly move to reflect the action on either side, but odds on "futures" bets never stray incredibly far from what they are initially set (and then later re-set) as by the handicappers. In that sense, they reflect both public opinion and the opinion of the professionals.

Oh, but they do. In some cases they move quite dramatically. Maybe not this late in the year, but over the course of the season they certainly can and will.

But that's neither here nor there. Even when they don't move much or at all, that doesn't mean that the oddsmaker had some sort of accurate prediction of the team's strength. Not at all. Rather, it means that the oddsmaker had a good gauge on public opinion. Which, by the way, is not that hard to do. Gamble enough, and you can predict the lines with remarkable accuracy before they come out.

The point is this: If some oddsmaker had an analysis that said the Suns had a 50% chance of winning the title, he certainly wouldn't put their odds at 6-to-5. Because nobody would bet them at 6-5! He'd put the line where he'd get some action.

In reality, oddsmakers don't do any analysis at all (of team strength). They simply do not care. All they care about is getting money coming through the window, and reducing risk accordingly.

[particleman]

I was at the palms a couple of weeks ago (the weekend they lost to the knicks) and got the Mavs at 15/1 to win the NBA championship. I think the MGM and Harrahs books had them at about 9/1. Not sure why there was such a discrepancy but I jumped on it. Anyway, I think it's interesting that the odds have improved despite Dallas' mediocre play recently.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Oh, but they do. In some cases they move quite dramatically. Maybe not this late in the year, but over the course of the season they certainly can and will.

But that's neither here nor there. Even when they don't move much or at all, that doesn't mean that the oddsmaker had some sort of accurate prediction of the team's strength. Not at all. Rather, it means that the oddsmaker had a good gauge on public opinion. Which, by the way, is not that hard to do. Gamble enough, and you can predict the lines with remarkable accuracy before they come out.

The point is this: If some oddsmaker had an analysis that said the Suns had a 50% chance of winning the title, he certainly wouldn't put their odds at 6-to-5. Because nobody would bet them at 6-5! He'd put the line where he'd get some action.

In reality, oddsmakers don't do any analysis at all (of team strength). They simply do not care. All they care about is getting money coming through the window, and reducing risk accordingly.

I didn't say they don't move (and if that's the impression I gave, my apologies). I said they don't move incredibly far from each time they are set. Futures odds are re-handicapped regularly. They don't work the same as single-game lines that are set once a day or two in advance and then shift only based on the action. When you see a "dramatic" shift in a futures line between Day A and Day B, it almost always started with the handicapper shifting the line, even if it also shifted some based on the action. For example, when the Mavs trade for Butler/Haywood and suddenly their odds jump from 24:1 to 10:1, it's not because there was so much action on that bet as to require a shift that monumental (and that is a HUGE shift). As soon as the trade was finalized, some handicappers reset the line at probably something closer to 12:1 or 10:1. The significance of all this is that handicappers maintain a fairly high degree of control over futures odds, relative to some of the other bets one can place.

I think you are quite inaccurate to say that handicappers don't do any analysis of team strength. Obviously, the ultimate objective as you say is to spread the action around, so handicappers are very concerned with public perception. But I fundamentally disagree that this doesn't also significantly entail an analysis of teams' relative strength. To the contrary, that is the single most important baseline from which the public-perception analysis is done.

[aurelino9]

More from Trollinger on Denver's recent woes. He still has the Mavs taking the third seed.

After a wild couple of days, we have some housekeeping to do regarding the Playoff Odds. For starters, Tuesday’s win by Dallas over Denver and San Antonio’s shocking loss to New Jersey removed most of the remaining drama from the Southwest division race. Dallas now projects to win the division in 91 percent of scenarios, while San Antonio has just a 9 percent chance.

Second, the Nuggets now seem in grave danger of opening the playoffs on the road. Denver is projected to land the fifth position and finish with 52 wins -- one fewer than both Dallas and Phoenix. The Nuggets also lose the tiebreak to Dallas and would need to beat the Suns on the road in April to win it against Phoenix.

Meanwhile, look out below. Denver has dropped five out of six without both Kenyon Martin and George Karl, and the schedule doesn’t get much easier going forward. For instance, Portland currently projects to take the No. 6 slot (they hold the tie-break over both San Antonio and Oklahoma City), but they could move into position to pass the Nuggets for fifth, especially with a win in Denver on Thursday.

If the Blazers win that game they’ll be in great shape to catch Denver at 51 wins -- rather than trailing by two games, as currently projected -- and would also win the tie-break based on conference record. Of course, the Blazers may want to stay right where they are. Dallas currently projects to take the No. 3 spot (automatically winning a tie with Phoenix as a division champion), and the Blazers have won the first three meetings between the teams.

According to Wednesday’s odds and after running all the tie-breaks, here's what the West pairings would be: Lakers-Thunder, Jazz-Spurs, Mavs-Blazers and Suns-Nuggets.

The other item of note out West is the difficulty of teams' remaining schedule. With very few gimmes left in conference play, nearly every Western power projects to go 4-4 or 5-3 over its final eight games. Several West clubs have enjoyed a steady diet of lightweights over the past month, but that party is over. For the most part, they’re now playing each other down the stretch.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...t-playoff-race

[bernardos70]

Hollinger ranks #1 in my Favorite Analysts Power Ranking, calculated using his own formula... that should tell you how much his formula sucks.

[rabbitproof]

Hollinger has a new article about LA showing weakness. So maybe his angle the Mavs haven't improved but LA and Denver has regressed sooo much the non-contender Mavs have a chance through no doing of their own?

[dirno2000]

I don't think there's anything too incendiary in there. We could very easily finish third with Utah one game back in the loss column and a three way tie with Utah and Denver looking more and more unlikely.

[LonghornDub]

If you look at all the remaining schedules, I think it's actually most likely that Phoenix ends up ahead of us. But we would run them over in the playoffs.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

If you look at all the remaining schedules, I think it's actually most likely that Phoenix ends up ahead of us. But we would run them over in the playoffs.

I won't shed any tears if Phoenix finishes ahead of us. In fact I'd rather finish 3rd behind Phoenix than 2nd with Utah being the 3rd seed.

Utah playing Denver in the first round and then either of those two playing the Lakers in the second round is an absolute dream scenario.

[Lestat_1795]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I won't shed any tears if Phoenix finishes ahead of us. In fact I'd rather finish 3rd behind Phoenix than 2nd with Utah being the 3rd seed.

Utah playing Denver in the first round and then either of those two playing the Lakers in the second round is an absolute dream scenario.

^ this

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I won't shed any tears if Phoenix finishes ahead of us. In fact I'd rather finish 3rd behind Phoenix than 2nd with Utah being the 3rd seed.

Utah playing Denver in the first round and then either of those two playing the Lakers in the second round is an absolute dream scenario.

Agreed on all counts. This would be absolutely terrific.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

I didn't say they don't move (and if that's the impression I gave, my apologies). I said they don't move incredibly far from each time they are set. Futures odds are re-handicapped regularly. They don't work the same as single-game lines that are set once a day or two in advance and then shift only based on the action. When you see a "dramatic" shift in a futures line between Day A and Day B, it almost always started with the handicapper shifting the line, even if it also shifted some based on the action. For example, when the Mavs trade for Butler/Haywood and suddenly their odds jump from 24:1 to 10:1, it's not because there was so much action on that bet as to require a shift that monumental (and that is a HUGE shift). As soon as the trade was finalized, some handicappers reset the line at probably something closer to 12:1 or 10:1. The significance of all this is that handicappers maintain a fairly high degree of control over futures odds, relative to some of the other bets one can place.

I think you are quite inaccurate to say that handicappers don't do any analysis of team strength. Obviously, the ultimate objective as you say is to spread the action around, so handicappers are very concerned with public perception. But I fundamentally disagree that this doesn't also significantly entail an analysis of teams' relative strength. To the contrary, that is the single most important baseline from which the public-perception analysis is done.

You make a good point that the handicappers do have some vested interest in putting out a reasonable line to begin with. This is because whoever bets it at that line keeps it at that line, no matter how much it later moves. And yes, I agree that they would move lines on their own for certain reasons, like the Mavs trade. But--and this is the key point--opening lines, and movement of lines for the reasons of trade or hot play and so forth, are very imprecise by nature. Handicappers are NOT trying to make an objective and precise analysis of where the teams stand. Instead, they are trying to place teams in relative "ballparks" and then go from there.

And of course, the ONLY goal they have is to maximize revenue. Handicappers NEVER "take a stand" with their lines. In other words, they never put up a line to try to "beat the public"--for example, laying very enticing long odds (say 50-to-1) on a middling contender just because they have some sort of analysis that says said team has next to zero chance to win it all. That runs entirely counter to their business model.

The bottom line is that the futures line you get reflects the prevailing mood of the betting public, not that of the handicapper. The reason one might find the Mavs at 20-to-1 at one book and 10-to-1 at another is not that the two books have a difference of opinion...it's that the 20-to-1 book needs to take some action on the Mavs to counterbalance something else (like overly heavy action on the Lakers, for example).

[aurelino9]

From today's chat

J-Holl, The Spurs are playing well lately. But without HCA I can't see them beating the Lakers or Jazz in the first round. Who would they like to see to start the playoffs? Mavs? Suns? Nugs?
John Hollinger
(12:09 PM)


Dallas or Denver is your stock answer for who any of the other six teams should want to see ... neither is exactly killing right now. I agree it will be tough for SA without home court, but that applies even more in a Utah series than it would against LA. And Utah beat them 4-0 in regular season. I wrote about this in today's PER Diem, but a lot of those teams at the bottom would probably rather face LA, believe it or not.


Professor, if the Mavs end up at #2 and positioned to play the Spurs, do you think they'll tank a game so they get the Thunder?
John Hollinger
(12:12 PM)


You mean, would Dallas intentionally move down to No. 3? I can't imagine doing that and giving up home court in a second round series -- the difference between Spurs and Thunder isn't large enough to make such a sacrifice

If the Blazers get matched up with Dallas in the first round, don't you think with the the success they've had against them and their recent blowout win with Dallas' post deadline roster, the Blazers have a great shot of advancing to round 2?
John Hollinger
(12:15 PM)


Yes, absolutely, and that could be either a 2-7, a 3-5, or a 4-6 pairing depending on how the final two weeks play out. Dallas is clearly Portland's preferred opponent; Utah is just as clearly whom they want to avoid.

Sebastian (Krakow, Poland)


If you only analyzed the post all star break games would the Mavs still be 15th?
John Hollinger
(12:42 PM)


Probably not 15th, but probably pretty close . Dallas' point diff is slightly better since the break, but it's against a very soft schedule (29th over last 25%, though that doesn't include some tougher games just after break) and with 13-10 home-road split.

Say OKC gets Utah and Portland gets Dallas. Is it crazy to assume that they could both advance?
John Hollinger
(12:47 PM)


Not crazy, although I'd like Portland's chances a lot better than OKC's. Thunder are a difficult match-up for Jazz.
Mike (RI)


John, sometimes you have to stay away from all your stats and do the eye test. The Mavs are much better then the 15th best team in the league with the trades they have made and how they have gelled. The Mavs are a top 5 team in the league.
John Hollinger
(12:52 PM)


This is probably the biggest point of disagreement I have with the Mavs supporters -- the impact of the trade, and particularly of Butler. He still as the star rep, but he's slipped a LOT from two-three years ago. He wasn't having a good year in Washington and hasn't been any better in Dallas; he's an isolation jump-shooter in a system that has plenty of that already and he brings nothing to the table defensively. Mavs fans hated Howard (not that they didn't have their reasons) and were ecstatic to see anybody else come in, but the Gasol trade it ain't. The #s bear it out -- adjusted for schedule and home court, Dallas's point diff isn't any better after trade than before. While I think that last data point is a bit TOO pessimistic, I don't see Butler as a game-changer.


I saw Cuban's thoughts on weighing road margin more than other things...could it be because Dallas is a good road team? I guess it's okay for an owner to be a homer, but he's not foolin anyone.
John Hollinger
(12:57 PM)


It didn't make sense to me either .. I think that's partly because communicating in 140-character 'paragraphs' doesn't make for real great discussion. But the road thing doesn't connect logically -- my home game is your road game, the one can't be more or less important than the other. Put another way, if we play a two-game series and the road team wins both teams, that doesn't suddenly make both of us better than if the home team had won each.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/31590

[LonghornDub]

No joke--I just used the playoff simulator on ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/predictions) with Hollinger's playoff odds as a base, and I got the Mavs beating the Cavs in the finals on my first sim. Upsets over the Jazz in the second round and the Cavs in the finals (beat the Suns in the WCF).

It is done. The Mavs will be champions.

*edit* Just did it again--Mavs over Hawks in the finals. This thing must know me.

[fluid.forty.one]

"Yes, absolutely, and that could be either a 2-7, a 3-5, or a 4-6 pairing depending on how the final two weeks play out. Dallas is clearly Portland's preferred opponent; Utah is just as clearly whom they want to avoid."

John needs to stop drinking on the job.

[jthig32]

I don't really have a huge issue with a lot of that analysis. Honestly he's relatively right on Butler (although he's brought more defense than John is admitting). But he continually disregards Haywood when discussing the effect of the trade, which is ridiculous.

[LonghornDub]

I have a huge issue with him saying that the Mavs are any worse than the 10th best team in the league.

[GermanFan]

never mind the simulator is really wierd

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/predictions

[SMC0007]

"John, sometimes you have to stay away from all your stats and do the eye test. The Mavs are much better then the 15th best team in the league with the trades they have made and how they have gelled. The Mavs are a top 5 team in the league.
John Hollinger
(12:52 PM)


This is probably the biggest point of disagreement I have with the Mavs supporters -- the impact of the trade, and particularly of Butler. He still as the star rep, but he's slipped a LOT from two-three years ago. He wasn't having a good year in Washington and hasn't been any better in Dallas; he's an isolation jump-shooter in a system that has plenty of that already and he brings nothing to the table defensively. Mavs fans hated Howard (not that they didn't have their reasons) and were ecstatic to see anybody else come in, but the Gasol trade it ain't. The #s bear it out -- adjusted for schedule and home court, Dallas's point diff isn't any better after trade than before. While I think that last data point is a bit TOO pessimistic, I don't see Butler as a game-changer."



Surely not far from home on that one.