Game #79: Toronto Raptors 92 - Indiana Pacers 73

[tDotted]

Okay that makes more sense then.

**EDIT: Yup that's how it works. We are 1-3 against LAC and Denver (who are currently not in the playoffs but are above .500 right now). Add 1-3 to my 22-17 and you get 23-20.

I think NBA.com has it as .500 when you play

http://stats.nba.com/standings/?Seas...ection=margins

[planetmars]

i think its current teams above .500.

Okay that makes more sense then.

**EDIT: Yup that's how it works. We are 1-3 against LAC and Denver (who are currently not in the playoffs but are above .500 right now). Add 1-3 to my 22-17 and you get 23-20.

[JawsGT]

Don't they rank a team as .500 or better at the time you play them?

So if it's the second game of the season and you are facing the 76ers who just lost to the Celtics and Wizards.. then Philly would technically be less than .500 at that time. And if you beat the 76ers it wouldn't count in that vs .500 and above calculation.

That stat then becomes about the schedule and is misleading.

Wouldn't the better stat be to see how well you did against playoff teams? And compile that stat at the end of the year?

Raptors are currently 13-10 against the East, and 9-7 against the West (assuming the season ends with Minny and NO in the playoffs). That's 22-17 overall.. with games left against Indiana and Miami. That looks better than 23-20

i think its current teams above .500.

[planetmars]

Don't they rank a team as .500 or better at the time you play them?

So if it's the second game of the season and you are facing the 76ers who just lost to the Celtics and Wizards.. then Philly would technically be less than .500 at that time. And if you beat the 76ers it wouldn't count in that vs .500 and above calculation.

That stat then becomes about the schedule and is misleading.

Wouldn't the better stat be to see how well you did against playoff teams? And compile that stat at the end of the year?

Raptors are currently 13-10 against the East, and 9-7 against the West (assuming the season ends with Minny and NO in the playoffs). That's 22-17 overall.. with games left against Indiana and Miami. That looks better than 23-20

[Bendit]

Sorry about the duplication ...but I didn't hear the claxons!

[G__Deane]

Just noticed...Kyrie Irving out for the season...another knee surgery.

I reported that in post #22 .... still waiting for my participation ribbon.
Dirk Nowitzki also done for the season although obviously less important for the post season situation
Man, if I were him, I'd retire and count my millions .....

[G__Deane]

So by the illustration below, the Raps (23-20), Cavs (21-22) and Celtics (25-20) ALL are less than impressive against .500 or better teams. I kept hearing from the talking heads how bad the Rpas record was against good teams and they had just padded the overall record against bad teams. Not once did they note that Cleveland is BELOW .500 against good teams. I had to look at that twice....

Contrast that against the Rockets (36-11) and the GSW (30-16, even with major injuries over the season) against .500 or better teams and you can really see how they have been the class of the NBA.

[tDotted]

Interesting stat. 6 of the 8 teams in the East are hovering slightly above or below break-even against > .500 teams. Doesn't seem to highlight us as clear cut playoff favorites, like Houston and GSW are out west, even though we're roughly in the same net rating range for the season.

Overall net rating vs .500+ teams is probably a better stat to gauge the quality of a team than just overall W/L.

[tDotted]

I think we can all agree with that. The Raptors will be viewed as "playoff chokers" until they break through LeBron

What a glorious day that will be. Championship before the Finals even start

[G__Deane]

See, I think golf is a terrible analogy for the point he's trying to make. Golf is full of guys who didn't have 'it', until suddenly they put together a great weekend at a major and then it turns out they actually did have 'it'. Sergio Garcia, for a recent example. The reality is that if you're good enough to win a lot of tour tournaments and constantly be in the mix in the majors, then eventually you're likely going to win a major. This is more about the backward-looking way that we craft sports narratives than about some truth of winning.

For a good golfer to win a tournament, you only have to be hot for one weekend even against a good field. It's the same as understanding that the worst team in the NBA can still beat the Cavs on a given night. Best of 7 though, hardly a chance. Even the teams "constantly in the mix ie a top 10 team doesn't mean they will eventually win an NBA title, far from it. Golf is different than team sports in that respect

[octothorp]

Boston hasn't lost to lower seeds in consecutive seasons [emoji6]

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

*cough* yet *cough*

[GOLDBLUM]

Boston however gets the wonderful narrative of "scrappy and well coached" no matter how many exits

To some, their narrative will remain that of 'Chowderheaded Dickfaces.'

[Nilanka]

Boston however gets the wonderful narrative of "scrappy and well coached" no matter how many exits

Boston hasn't lost to lower seeds in consecutive seasons [emoji6]

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[KeonClark]

I think we can all agree with that. The Raptors will be viewed as "playoff chokers" until they break through LeBron

Boston however gets the wonderful narrative of "scrappy and well coached" no matter how many exits

[Nilanka]

What I disagree with isn't saying that there's a mental component to it. I accept that, I fully believe that there's a major mental component to winning. What I disagree with is the idea that the mental side of it isn't something that you can work on and improve upon. Just being in those situations repeatedly makes you better at them, and being able to rise to the occasion is something very few pro athletes can do at an elite level in their first opportunities.

I think we can all agree with that. The Raptors will be viewed as "playoff chokers" until they break through LeBron