bukie

The plus side to not having a really good WR is that they're all really easily interchangeable.

Ok, one last thing. If the Sagarin predictor was used to project the NBA playoff seeds: West 1. New Orleans 2. LA Lakers 3. Denver 4. Dallas 5. Portland 6. San Antonio 7. Utah 8. Phoenix - Most would probably agree that LA should win the west easily and that New Orleans won't be able to keep up their level of play. Plus, Oklahoma City has played terrible thus far, and would be expected to pick it up. Other than that, though, it's as good an indicator as any. New Orleans has been that good, and Oklahoma City has been that bad. East 1. Miami 2. Boston 3. Orlando 4. Milwaukee 5. Chicago 6. Atlanta 7. Indiana 8. Philadelphia - The scariest thing to me about the Heat is that they have played this well already, and there's no indication they can't continue to play as well as they have so far, and that they could even pick it up somewhat. Chicago is playing without Boozer yet and could be expected to climb a bit yet, but beyond that it's pretty accurate.

Last word on the subject, for now. Final standings predictions, based on various ratings/statistics (just for Miami here, because I don't have all day, sorry): W/L (5-4): 46-36 Pythagorean (7.2-1.8): 63-19 Sagarin predictor: 64-18 (converted using Pomeroy's predictions method based on proposed scores of remaining games vs. probability of victory) Hollinger ratings: 66-16 (using same method...yesterday it would have been 69-13) Now, I'm not saying they'll finish the year 61-12. But, I do have a feeling they'll end the year much closer to their predictive statistics methods than what their current W/L record would indicate. And I'm not even saying that I want them to win it all and be the best team. I was just surprised that even with what's happened thus far, they're still coming out as the best team statistically overall.

If the "common sense" approach is seeing a 5-4 record and chuckling to myself while popping a bottle of champagne on behalf of the 1996 Bulls, I'll take the statistical model, thanks. Huh? So you think Miami is going 67-6 the rest of the way? Yes, that's exactly what I said. What are you saying? Because it seems pretty damn clear you are saying that despite the current record the Heat will still win however many they need to beat that record. Then you're either not understanding or you're intentionally trying to create an argument that isn't there. I haven't said one thing about that record in any post, aside from the champagne-popping schadenfreude-loving Bulls fanbase. The record, ultimately, means little. They're not statistically likely to beat it. However, they are still a very good team, and have played better than it looks at first glance.

Either obtuse means the opposite of what you think it means, or you don't get it. I'm just saying there are several statistic measures that indicate Miami, even now, isn't doing nearly as poorly as ignorant media pundits and schadenfreude-filled fans think they are. And you don't have to be stupid to believe it, either. And it's not just Sagarin, or just adding up individual PER's, either. Look at Hollinger's team ratings (which I promise you aren't doctored to favor the Heat), look at BP's SCHOENE projections (which, admittedly, costs money), or offensive and defensive efficiency, or adjusted scoring margin, or even basic scoring margin! At the end of the day, simply looking at W-L record has one purpose: whether or not you get into the playoffs. Beyond that, it tells very little about the quality of a team, the likelihood of a team winning, or even eliminate the possibility that the lesser team can win 4 of 7. And I'm pretty sure if you asked Sagarin (or even Hollinger), he'd give the Heat the best odds of winning it all, even today. However, even if those odds against the Lakers and Celtics were 55%, that still leaves a 45% chance they don't. Nobody's guaranteeing anything, here, just pointing out that the Heat are in fact playing better than their W-L record indicates.

Wins after 9 games is hardly the most important one. And wins is only important to the extent that you have to beat out 7 teams in your conference in that column to make the playoffs, and a little bit regarding how many home games you'd like, since it's about a 4-point swing in general. Past that, it's about predicting how well a team will do going forward, and treating a 20 point win over Orlando the same as a 2 point overtime loss to Utah as exactly the same is not very accurately predictive. And who's talking PER? PER is a very offensive-biased individual statistic, and I'm going strictly on team predictions, here. Individual stats aren't being factored in on any level, here, aside from being compiled to perform team point differentials. Fair enough. But wins after 9 games is still better than using statistical predictors after 9 games. Err, no it isn't. Or are the Heat going to win 45 games this year?

If the "common sense" approach is seeing a 5-4 record and chuckling to myself while popping a bottle of champagne on behalf of the 1996 Bulls, I'll take the statistical model, thanks. Huh? So you think Miami is going 67-6 the rest of the way? Yes, that's exactly what I said.

Wins after 9 games is hardly the most important one. And wins is only important to the extent that you have to beat out 7 teams in your conference in that column to make the playoffs, and a little bit regarding how many home games you'd like, since it's about a 4-point swing in general. Past that, it's about predicting how well a team will do going forward, and treating a 20 point win over Orlando the same as a 2 point overtime loss to Utah as exactly the same is not very accurately predictive. And who's talking PER? PER is a very offensive-biased individual statistic, and I'm going strictly on team predictions, here. Individual stats aren't being factored in on any level, here, aside from being compiled to perform team point differentials.

If the "common sense" approach is seeing a 5-4 record and chuckling to myself while popping a bottle of champagne on behalf of the 1996 Bulls, I'll take the statistical model, thanks.

They're not capturing how well they "should" be playing, they're capturing how well they are playing right now, and it's still the best in the NBA. So, yes, people in their right minds think the Heat are the best team in the NBA right now. People drunk on meaningless 9-game schadenfreude are not in their right minds. Here is what is factual: the Heat, despite being 5-4, have the highest scoring margin in the Eastern Conference (second in the NBA), while playing one of the toughest schedules to this point, and absolutely blew out the team with the next best margin in the East. Two close losses to Boston, an OT loss to Utah and a 3-point loss in New Orleans doesn't counteract all that enough to drop the Heat behind even the Lakers, let alone any other team in the NBA. Right now, it's the Heat and the Lakers and it's everyone else. And if this is what the Heat do when struggling, they'll be scary good when things click.

How clear is it if the Heat are still statistically the superior team in the NBA? Sure, it's fun to bask in the schadenfreude, but the reality is that if this is the "struggling Heat", they're going to lap the league when things click. Based on what? Are you talking about Hollinger's power rankings on espn? It's even worse than the BCS. Look how well he predicts NBA standings. He's no better than anyone else, and goes out on a limb about as often as Dick Vitale does when he picks NCAA hoops. The Bulls just crushed a Golden State team which just beat the Knicks on the road. Yet the Knicks beat the Bulls at home. so how does this factor into his ratings? I just don't believe you can easily distill basketball to stats. More than a lot of media guys, Hollinger seems to have an increased interest in the Heat, because he and his PER predicted that the Heat should run away with a title. Him and his PER will end up looking bad if the Heat are a flop. He predicted 68 wins. I also happen to believe the PER is stupid. A decent player on a bad team can put up big numbers (Chris Bosh). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out he wasn't going to do it with the Heat. And no amount of math could replace common sense there. No, basically every predictive statistical measure has the Heat on top of the NBA right now. "Common Sense" is highly subjective, and everybody has an increased level of interest in the Heat. The statistics aren't massaged to make the Heat look good, the Heat look good, and it shows in the statistics. Four single-digit losses against good teams where they still played well aren't enough to sway them. The "eye test" is a far worse way of evaluating team performance than almost any statistical measure. As much as basketball can be a team sport, it's far less so of a "team is greater than the sum of parts" than the NBA, NHL or pro soccer. It is more team-based than baseball, though, so it has that going for it.

I'm also looking forward to Utah State finishing the year with 1, maybe 2 losses with that schedule, getting a 3 seed, and getting totally outclassed in the tourney.

He also picks Gonzaga to the Final Four. Although, Lunardi picks Gonzaga to win.

How clear is it if the Heat are still statistically the superior team in the NBA? Sure, it's fun to bask in the schadenfreude, but the reality is that if this is the "struggling Heat", they're going to lap the league when things click.

Updated NBA Predictor ratings, after last night: 1. Miami Heat 2. New Orleans Hornets 3. Los Angeles Lakers 4. Boston Celtics 5. Denver Nuggets 6. Dallas Mavericks 7. Orlando Magic 8. Portland Trail Blazers 9. San Antonio Spurs 10. Milwaukee Bucks 11. Utah Jazz 12. Chicago Bulls 13. Phoenix Suns 14. Atlanta Hawks 15. Indiana Pacers 16. Houston Rockets 17. Memphis Grizzlies 18. Philadelphia 76ers 19. Golden State Warriors 20. New York Knicks 21. Oklahoma City Thunder 22. Charlotte Bobcats 23. Toronto Raptors 24. Cleveland Cavaliers 25. Los Angeles Clippers 26. Detroit Pistons 27. New Jersey Nets 28. Washington Wizards 29. Sacramento Kings 30. Minnesota Timberwolves So, yes, Miami still on top. East/West getting more balanced, now, as the East has 7 of the top 15.

Bulls only committed 7 fouls all game. That's really the stat that sticks out to me the most. EDIT: Also, Scalabrine somehow managed a -1 in a 30 point win.

Team Crosby vs Team Ovechkin? I'd tune in.

Mark Bu...ohhhhhh....

How is that pronounced, anyway?

This year's NHL all-star teams will be picked from a pool of players by captains from each conference: http://bit.ly/bjTvWk

we were "badly outplayed" if you completely ignore turnovers, but if we do that then we also outplayed NYG, GB (by a huge margin), PHI at any rate, Stafford's probably lost for the year, so any goodwill i had for the season is mostly lost; you guys can keep incorrectly saying that we've sucked so far and i probably won't too much care about it Even including the turnovers, that was by far the Bears' best VOA of the year, even better than the Carolina game. I'm not sure how rating Detroit middle of the pack, just ahead of Minnesota and Chicago indicates they've sucked.

I know this is the first game all year, but this is the best Illinois has looked in a long while.

He's grown three times his size!

Also, for the record, here are the AFC teams I would consider better than the Bucs and Seahawks: 1. Steelers 2. Patriots 3. Colts 4. Titans 5. Ravens 6. Jets 7. Chiefs 8. Chargers 9. Raiders 10. Texans 11. Browns 12. Dolphins

The Seahawks are coming off two awful weeks, but they've been able to dominate at home for the most part to the extent that if they win the NFC West, there's a decent chance they're favored against the wildcard team they'd play. The Bucs had a much better showing in Atlanta than I expected them to have, to the point where they might just be able to steal a wildcard spot. The Lions have to be the most feel-good 2-6 team in NFL history, having played a single blowout win against a bad Rams team and not having won a road game in 3 years. Blame the refs for the CJ "catch" all you will, that team was badly outplayed by a Bears team that hasn't been able to mount much of anything offensively since.