Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NBA.com Power Rankings - Raps #12

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    enlightenment wrote: View Post
    You got those backwards, 7th in Def, 10th in Off.

    Its spectacular, and just shows that we are a well balanced team. I truly believe that as this team grows, we can become serious defensive stalwarts. If we are 10th in Off, without a polished offensive system (ours is very basic), it means we can hang our hat on our defence despite fluctuations in scoring nights and still win.

    Focus on D, and let the O do its thing.
    If the raps smarten up they'd give TR a couple more looks per game.

    I'd like to see them go to TR early in the game then move to JV once the floor is opened up a bit. Right now their 1st quarter is so predictable. Couple plays for JV that don't work, some late clock mid range J's and finally some heroics from one of the starters to prevent total embarrassment.
    Sunny ways my friends, sunny ways
    Because its 2015

    Comment


    • #77
      Loving the defence. Man if we could just stop turning the ball over whenever Lowry goes to the bench that ranking would be so much better

      Comment


      • #78
        How do they determine these ratings? I swear when I look on espn's stats we are like 18th in points per game and like 20 something in field goal percentage and then 13-14 in three point percentage. How does that become 10th in offensive efficiency? Just wondering
        I relish negativity and disappointment. It is not healthy. Somebody buy me a pony.

        Comment


        • #79
          GLF wrote: View Post
          How do they determine these ratings? I swear when I look on espn's stats we are like 18th in points per game and like 20 something in field goal percentage and then 13-14 in three point percentage. How does that become 10th in offensive efficiency? Just wondering
          I believe ESPN's is simply points-per-game for and against. A team can have a higher PPG simply by playing at a fast pace, or a low PPG against by playing at a slow pace. Offensive efficiency is much more complex, but the key difference is that it looks at how you perform on a per-possession rate.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_rating

          Comment


          • #80
            OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
            Basically what these rankings are saying is that as a team we are doing well, but are lacking that superstar to take us to the level of Miami and Indiana and be able to beat them.
            Not necessarily. What we are lacking is development and consistency from Ross and JV, as well as a better bench - both of which are highly achievable. I also think we're lacking elite coaching, but we'll leave that for another debate.

            Comment


            • #81
              golden wrote: View Post
              Not necessarily. What we are lacking is development and consistency from Ross and JV, as well as a better bench - both of which are highly achievable. I also think we're lacking elite coaching, but we'll leave that for another debate.

              Overall, I agree with you. We've seen teams compete at high levels before without any superstars, but I really think that our x factor(s) are our young guys- T Ross, JV, as well as our front court's defence/ rebounding.

              Being top 10 in both Offensive and defensive efficiency is quite something, and I would credit that to DC and the coaching staff. He's no Popovich or Thibodeau, but he's been doing a good job this year.
              I know this may be a bit controversial but I think the Raptors have proven that they're the best team in the NBA from Canada
              -random Facebook user. 2016

              Comment


              • #82
                octothorp wrote: View Post
                I believe ESPN's is simply points-per-game for and against. A team can have a higher PPG simply by playing at a fast pace, or a low PPG against by playing at a slow pace. Offensive efficiency is much more complex, but the key difference is that it looks at how you perform on a per-possession rate.
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_rating
                Oh okay. So would you say Offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency is more accurate than what espn shows?
                I relish negativity and disappointment. It is not healthy. Somebody buy me a pony.

                Comment


                • #83
                  To give you a simple answer, yes efficiency ratings are more accurate than ppg when determining which offence or defense contributes more to winning. (Although different sites have different formulas on efficiency, and you won't find agreement on which is the more accurate formula.)

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    They're still at #12. Anyway, I think this is a pretty good assessment of where they are in the league, as I would say they have a shot at a close second round series of 5-6 games if Lowry & Demar play as well as they have shown they can with contributions from everyone else like Ross and Valanciunas and Amir and Patterson.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      octothorp wrote: View Post
                      To give you a simple answer, yes efficiency ratings are more accurate than ppg when determining which offence or defense contributes more to winning. (Although different sites have different formulas on efficiency, and you won't find agreement on which is the more accurate formula.)
                      Oh okay. Well that's crazy to see how well we seem to be doing right now.
                      I relish negativity and disappointment. It is not healthy. Somebody buy me a pony.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        For what it's worth, I like the team stats here:
                        http://www.nbastuffer.com/2013-2014_...ced_Stats.html

                        Because it has efficiency differential, which is very useful but hard to find: basically, offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency. Toronto ranks 11th in that, and it's a realistic indicator of where we're at.

                        Also, the Power Rankings chart here is a really useful way of seeing where teams are in terms of offensive and defensive ratings. And it really emphasizes which teams win because of offense (Portland), because of defense (Indiana to an absurd degree), or because of a balanced approach (Oklahoma, San Antonio, and to a lesser degree, Toronto).

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          octothorp wrote: View Post
                          For what it's worth, I like the team stats here:
                          http://www.nbastuffer.com/2013-2014_...ced_Stats.html

                          Because it has efficiency differential, which is very useful but hard to find: basically, offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency. Toronto ranks 11th in that, and it's a realistic indicator of where we're at.

                          Also, the Power Rankings chart here is a really useful way of seeing where teams are in terms of offensive and defensive ratings. And it really emphasizes which teams win because of offense (Portland), because of defense (Indiana to an absurd degree), or because of a balanced approach (Oklahoma, San Antonio, and to a lesser degree, Toronto).
                          Net Rating is available on NBA.com as well.

                          http://stats.nba.com/leagueTeamGener...&sortOrder=DES

                          We're currently 9th in the league.
                          twitter.com/dhackett1565

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            CBS Sports has us at number 5.

                            This team isn't necessarily young, fun and naive. It's just playing well. In a month we find out a lot more.
                            http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/2...-spurs-rockets

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Nilanka wrote: View Post
                              That is a great line.

                              Comment


                              • #90



                                amazing numbers.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X