Nine Teams, One Title

9. Oklahoma City Thunder (51-31): Last time: 9th
The Thunder are one of the hottest teams in the NBA since the break. Their top five-player unit has run up a 40-22 record on the season, which is good enough to earn them a trip to the playoffs. Unfortunately, OKC is sub .500 against playoff teams and sub .400 against the other elite teams. That means the playoff experience will likely be brief.
Chances of winning: 4.1%

8. Boston Celtics (53-29): Last time: 8th
There is now some stability at the bottom of the list, as both OKC and Boston remain in their previous spots. The Celtics have a solid (51% wins) record against playoff teams, but they are sub .500 against elite teams. They should see the second round, but any more than that would be a surprise.
Chances of winning: 4.5%

7. Utah Jazz (53-29): Last time: 6th
A consistently solid team that does not have what it takes to win against the elite teams of the NBA, the Jazz top five have won a modest 56% of their games together. In the tough West, they may not even see the second round.
Chances of winning: 4.9%

6. Atlanta Hawks (53-29): Last time: 7th
Atlanta trades places with Utah, but while the Hawks have shown impressive health (the top five have played 63 of the 64 games together), they are just .500 against playoff teams and have won only 42% of their games against elite teams. They seem to have become the third or fourth team in the East.
Chances of winning: 5.4%

5. Los Angeles Lakers (60-22): Last time: 2nd
Most shocking statistical reversal on the season comes from a look at the top five's record together. When Fisher, Bryant, Artest, Gasol, and Bynum played together, they won 22 of their first 26 of the season. Since then, that five-man unit has won just 7 of 13. Lakers dip out of the elite marks for record against playoff teams and against elite teams. The team is either resting up for a playoff push or they're pressing too hard.
Chances of winning: 9.4%

4. Orlando Magic (54-28): Last time: 5th
Orlando's top five have won 13 of the last 17 they have played together. The Magic have won 64% of their games against playoff teams, 56% of their games against elite teams, and are now firmly the second best team in the East.
Chances of winning: 12.8%

3. Dallas Mavericks (56-26): Last time: 4th
Since the acquisition of Butler and Haywood, the Mavs have been arguably the best team in the NBA. That starting group has won 8 of the 9 they have played together, and now have the star power to win in the playoffs. They have the league's third best record against elite teams.
Chances of winning: 16.0%

2. Denver Nuggets (56-26): Last time: 3rd
Some facts: Denver's 29-7 record for their top five is third best in the NBA. Their 65% wins against playoff teams is second best. Their 71% wins against elite teams is best in the NBA. Anyone, repeat anyone, who has to face Denver in the playoffs is in trouble assuming K-Mart comes back full strength.
Chances of winning: 18.0%

1. Cleveland Cavaliers (63-19): Last time: 1st
Since the acquisition of Antawn Jamison, the best five has played just two games together. They won both of those games. Cleveland has the best record in the NBA, the best record against playoff teams, and the second best record against elite teams. They are the team to beat.
Chances of winning: 24.9%

Great comment, guys. Really appreciate the hard-hitting analysis.

This is the first time the Lakers have fallen back so far (you can see previous ones under Wannabes). Calculations are made based on overall record, record of the team when their best players are healthy, record against playoff teams, and record against other elite teams. LA has really fallen in all these categories of late.

There's no calculation that accounts for Kobe Bryant or the playoff experience of this team, but I think there's no doubt that both Denver and Dallas would be incredibly tough matchups for LA at this point.

Alcindor, you might engage with the information presented.
Better overall record: Cavs
Better w-l vs. playoff teams: Cavs (and Denver)
Better w-l vs. top 10 teams: Cavs (and Denver)
In a very limited sample size, better record with their best lineup on the court: Cavs
Head-to-Head: Cavs (and Denver)

Maybe you don't have an opinion. Maybe you do but do not care whether anyone hears it. You seem to think that the Nuggets have a better chance of winning compared to the Lakers than the system is showing. I welcome an argument. I'm not interested in providing a forum for your tantrum, but if you'd like to engage, please feel free.

Alcindor wrote:Relax. I don’t know what “tantrum” are you referring to. Nothing worse than someone who adds presumed negative emotion to someone else’s comments that doesn’t exist in an attempt to make them look bad.

Yeah, it turns out "whack" is offensive. You should know that this disclaimer has been in these posts before. For example, you could read the following at: lakers-blogs/wannabes-t118863.html

I tinker with stats. I won't tell you how I come to these stats because there's no point in that. I also have no idea how accurate these stats are going to be in predicting the outcome of the playoffs. I'll just say they're somewhat similar to the stats I've used to project playoffs the last two years and those numbers were quite accurate.

You can take it or leave it, but I'd sure love to see someone engage with the material as opposed to flitting in with a snide comment that's not well thought out and doesn't engage with the material. The board considers it trolling.

As to me seeming to think that the Nuggets have a better chance of winning compared to the Lakers than the system is showing, I have no idea what you are talking about, my first comment said exactly the opposite.

I'll explain: you seemed to find fault with the Lakers' chances of winning being half that of the Nuggets. So you seemed to think that the Nuggets chances should be different (i.e., less than 18%), as compared to that of the Lakers (which is currently 9.4%).

Dig up the Lakers stats for the 2000-2001 56 win season which then went 15-1 in the playoffs. It’s just not a great way to determine playoff performance IMO.

A few points. First, you know that finding one instance where a formula predicts that someone else has a 25% chance of winning, but a team with a 10% chance of winning wins is no counterexample to the formula. After all, Vegas doesn't scrap their formulae when an underdog wins.

Second, you wonder where the Lakers might have been that year?
1. They had the second best record in the NBA (Philly, who made the Finals, had the best in the East). San Antonio had a better record by 2 games.
2. Their starting PG (Fisher) missed 62 games, Kobe missed 14, Shaq missed 8, Fox and Grant missed only 5 each. Record with the five best players is one of the criteria. In those 20 games Fisher played, the Lakers were 15-5, which trends to 62 wins. That's a very good win%, if this year's numbers are any indication (that would be 3rd best this year).
3. The Lakers closed the season winning 8 straight and 9 of 10. Current streaks and trends are one of the criteria in the ranking. So they'd be entering the playoffs with a boost.

So, to be honest, I'd wager the Lakers would have been the top team that season, according to my rankings. Now are you on board?

thkthebest wrote:I'm actually curious to know how you determine the percentage, although I'm guessing you won't disclose that.

Do you happen to have a list of how accurate your calculations have been with past seasons? For example, how many times has your most likely team won the championship? Second most likely?

I use Bayesian theory on five different categories: past 10 games, season record, vs. top 10 teams, vs. top 16 teams, and record with best players in the lineup.

I'll dig up the previous prediction threads. I use a more detailed formula for that because I know which teams are matching up against which team at that point.

Link to last year's playoff projections: http://www.clublakers.com/lakers-discussion/trodgers-playoff-thread-full-2nd-round-t109485.html?hilit=playoff%20projections&start=20

2008/09 Playoffs:
First Round: 7 of 8 winners
Second Round: 3 of 4 winners
Third Round: 2 of 2 winners
Finals: 1 of 1 winner
Overall: got 13 of 15 winners right