Using the same formula, and the same gambling website (Statfox Sports), that I used to power rank the likely NCAA tournament field, I power ranked the National Basketball Association.
My NBA chart is set up a bit differently because I condensed three steps. Instead of posting each team’s Win Score and Defensive Win Score, followed by the expected winning percentage and then the winning percentage the rest of the league is posting against the same schedule, and then the “Ty Rating” based upon that, instead I post below the “Comparative Win Score” the “Comparative Defensive Win Score” and the Ty Rating based upon the same. Let me provide a quick example.
Example using the #20 Milwaukee Bucks
Below on the chart, the 20th ranked team is the Milwaukee Bucks. Under “WS” the Bucks post a “-1.1”. That means the Bucks Team Win Score is 1.1 points below the Win Score the rest of the NBA is posting against the same schedule. Under “DWS” it says “-2.1”. That means that the Bucks are allowing their Opponents to post Win Scores that are 2.1 points higher than the same teams have been able to post against the rest of the NBA. (Defensive Win Scores that are indicated as negative mean a below average performance). If you add the two numbers together, you arrive at “-3.2”. You then divide that by 10 to arrive at “-0.32”. This is the Bucks “absolute” Marginal Win Score, from which I can calculate their absolute winning percentage, which is their “Ty Rating”. Essentially, it is the difference between the winning percentage the team has achieved versus the winning percentage the rest of the NBA has achieved against the same schedule plus 0.500. So, while the Bucks expected winning percentage is 0.404% (11.7 wins and 17.3 losses — the team is actually 12-17), because the rest of the NBA is only playing 0.455% basketball against the same schedule the Bucks have played, the Bucks “absolute” winning percentage, or their “Ty Rating” is 0.449%, so its a little better.
Here is the chart:
NBA Ty Ratings
Heat and Bulls clearly the NBA elite
Its neck-and-neck between the Miami Heat and the Chicago Bulls for best team in the NBA. The two teams also rank #1 and #2 in overall offensive efficiency (by which I mean relative Win Score), and they invert that order for #1 and #2 in overall defensive teams in the NBA as well (by which I mean relative Defensive Win Score).
Three teams surprised me with their placement. The Lakers are a lot higher than I anticipated. They may have some fight left in the Purple and Gold. And on the other side, the Boston Celtics placed much lower than I expected at #17. The Celtics still play top 10 defense, but without Kendrick Perkins, the team is really struggling on the boards, and that is costing them games. The other team who placed much lower than I anticipated was the New York Knickerbockers. However, as I discussed two posts ago, the addition of world famous PG Jeremy Lin, the Knicks have shored up a major weakness and may begin to ascend the rankings.
Another surprise was the Minnesota Timberwolves. I knew they were playing much better this season, but it is actually their defense that is propelling them more so than their offense. That is surprising. The aforementioned Bucks seem to have been stuck in the #18-#21 power ranking range throughout the entire Scott Skiles/John Hammond administration. That is disappointing, to say the least.
Finally, we have the putrid Charlotte Bobcats and almost-as-putrid Washington Wizards. What is the thread that runs between each organization? Michael Jeffrey Jordan was in a management position for each. Bucks fans, we cannot be thankful for much, but we can be thankful for this: Herb Kohl prevented Michael Jordan from bringing his eye for talent to Milwaukee. Jordan makes Isiah Thomas look like Branch Rickey.
Finally, has anyone heard from PG John Wall? I thought he was supposed to be such a game changer for the Wizards when they selected him number one overall last season. He certainly has not been. His career is heading toward oblivion, just as many of us predicted when he was drafted.