Hollinger Humor

[moiso]

At least the formula doesn't show that Charlotte is the best team.  I don't think it's so crazy that Boston and Miami are pretty much tied for #1.  There is something to be said for point differential.  If so many people dislike Hollinger, why even react to what he writes?  If it's phony, then pay it no mind.  We know that if the Celts are healthy in the playoffs there will be no stopping them.

[BballTim]

A few things:

1. Just because somebody rejects Hollinger's formula doesn't mean that they reject all statistical models. Hollinger's seems flawed, in part because it totally rejects H2H and winning percentage. Similarly, there are better measures of SOS than simply looking at opponent's winning percentage.

2. Hollinger's model may be based upon data rather than emotion, but "objective" doesn't mean" accurate". It's a formula created by a fallible man. It's like arguing that the BCS computers should determine the national champion, because they're" objective".

For point #1, though, in order to criticize this particular method for rejecting head to head and winning percentage, don't you have to provide some evidence that winning percentage and head to head matter significantly when trying to predict future results? I think those two criteria are rejected for a reason: they have historically had little to do with what happens in the future relative to scoring margin.

  Do people have sources other than Hollinger for these metrics? "head and winning percentage have historically had little to do with what happens in the future relative to scoring margin" seems like an overstatement compared to Hollinger's "these rankings use points scored and points allowed, which are better indicators of a team's quality than wins and losses".

[MBunge]

According to Hollinger, the 10-15 Rockets are the 11th best team in the league and the 10-15 76ers are the 12th best team.  Does anyone think that's even vaguely accurate?  It's not just at the top that you see problems with his rankings.

I wouldn't say Hollinger's system is totally useless, but it has serious problems and everyone should be able to agree on that.

Mike

[BballTim]

According to Hollinger, the 10-15 Rockets are the 11th best team in the league and the 10-15 76ers are the 12th best team.  Does anyone think that's even vaguely accurate?  It's not just at the top that you see problems with his rankings.

I wouldn't say Hollinger's system is totally useless, but it has serious problems and everyone should be able to agree on that.

Mike

  He's just looking at current snapshots. The 76ers are 10-15 but have won 7 out of their last 10. Inidana's 11-14 and have lost 6 of 10. If they were playing tonight, who would you pick to win? The better team or the hotter team?

[LooseCannon]

According to Hollinger, the 10-15 Rockets are the 11th best team in the league and the 10-15 76ers are the 12th best team.  Does anyone think that's even vaguely accurate?  It's not just at the top that you see problems with his rankings.

If you look at the numbers, there's not a lot of separation between 10th and 18th.  If I said that those teams are mostly interchangeable, and there's not one that strikes as me as the clear best or worst of that lot, would you agree me?

Are the Rockets and 76ers better than their records indicate?  Are the Knicks and Hawks not as good as their records indicate?  That's the sort of thing, not the strict ranking of teams from top to bottom, that Hollinger's power rankings are supposed to create discussion about.

[Celtics4ever]

We have beat MIA twice so I am not worried about these hypothetical ratings.  Hollinger is one of the annointers of the HEAT during the off season and is hoping they save his face.

[Q_FBE]

Hey, Hollinger is obsessed with formulas and numerology.... we have something in common

Nobody really knows what his formula is or how often he tweeks it.

I do the same thing behind the scenes trying to come up with a perfect formula to predict the outcome of NBA games and the directions of the stock market so I can get out of this engineering job some day and support myself.

Hollinger reminds of this young engineer I used to work with who had high grades in college but it simply did not translate to the business world. Everything could be described by NUMBERS. Later I learned he was diagnosed with Asburger's syndrome, which explains why he could not communicate in the english language. I wonder how much ESPN is paying him to run his numbers and where can I get this wonderful gig?

[MBunge]

According to Hollinger, the 10-15 Rockets are the 11th best team in the league and the 10-15 76ers are the 12th best team.  Does anyone think that's even vaguely accurate?  It's not just at the top that you see problems with his rankings.

I wouldn't say Hollinger's system is totally useless, but it has serious problems and everyone should be able to agree on that.

Mike

  He's just looking at current snapshots. The 76ers are 10-15 but have won 7 out of their last 10. Inidana's 11-14 and have lost 6 of 10. If they were playing tonight, who would you pick to win? The better team or the hotter team?

By definition, something that's takes into account strength of schedule, margin of victory and record over the last 10 games is not "looking at current snapshots".  Nor is it measuring the "hotter" team, because then neither the 6ers or Rockets would be ranked over the Knicks, which they are.

Mike

[MBunge]

If you look at the numbers, there's not a lot of separation between 10th and 18th.  If I said that those teams are mostly interchangeable, and there's not one that strikes as me as the clear best or worst of that lot, would you agree me?

No.  I'd say the Hawks and Knicks are clearly better and playing better right now than the Rockets, for example.

Mike

[fairweatherfan]

Nobody really knows what his formula is or how often he tweeks it.

Formula's been on ESPN.com for literally years now.  Here you go:

HOLLINGER'S FORMULA

RATING = (((SOS-0.5)/0.037)*0.67) + (((SOSL10-0.5)/0.037)*0.33) + 100 + (0.67*(MARG+(((ROAD-HOME)*3.5)/(GAMES))) + (0.33*(MARGL10+(((ROAD10-HOME10)*3.5)/(10)))))

SOS = Season win/loss percentage of team's opponents, expressed as a decimal (e.g., .500)

SOSL10 = Season win/loss percentage of team's last 10 opponents, expressed as a decimal (e.g., .500)

MARG = Team's average scoring margin

MARGL10 = Team's average scoring margin over the last 10 games

HOME = Team's home games

HOMEL10 = Team's home games over the last 10 games

ROAD = Team's road games

ROADL10 = Team's road games over the last 10 games

GAMES = Team's total games

Only thing missing is after 40 games, the "last 10" stuff becomes "last 25% of the schedule".

[BballTim]

According to Hollinger, the 10-15 Rockets are the 11th best team in the league and the 10-15 76ers are the 12th best team.  Does anyone think that's even vaguely accurate?  It's not just at the top that you see problems with his rankings.

I wouldn't say Hollinger's system is totally useless, but it has serious problems and everyone should be able to agree on that.

Mike

  He's just looking at current snapshots. The 76ers are 10-15 but have won 7 out of their last 10. Inidana's 11-14 and have lost 6 of 10. If they were playing tonight, who would you pick to win? The better team or the hotter team?

By definition, something that's takes into account strength of schedule, margin of victory and record over the last 10 games is not "looking at current snapshots".

  First of all, there's no truth to that statement at all.

  Secondly, what I was saying was it's more a measure of how a team is performing right now or at least very recently as opposed to how it's performed over the course of the season.

 Nor is it measuring the "hotter" team, because then neither the 6ers or Rockets would be ranked over the Knicks, which they are.

  I'm sure that depends on how you define "hotter". Over the last 10 games, the Knicks are 8-2 with an average margin of 5.4 vs teams that have won a combined 42% of their games. The 76ers are 7-3 with an average margin of 8.5 vs teams that have won a combined 47% of their games. The Rockets are 6-4 with an average margin of 3.8 vs teams that have won a combined 53% of their games. The Knicks have the best record but have been playing the worst competition.

[MBunge]

By definition, something that's takes into account strength of schedule, margin of victory and record over the last 10 games is not "looking at current snapshots".

  First of all, there's no truth to that statement at all.

  Secondly, what I was saying was it's more a measure of how a team is performing right now or at least very recently as opposed to how it's performed over the course of the season.

 Nor is it measuring the "hotter" team, because then neither the 6ers or Rockets would be ranked over the Knicks, which they are.

  I'm sure that depends on how you define "hotter". Over the last 10 games, the Knicks are 8-2 with an average margin of 5.4 vs teams that have won a combined 42% of their games. The 76ers are 7-3 with an average margin of 8.5 vs teams that have won a combined 47% of their games. The Rockets are 6-4 with an average margin of 3.8 vs teams that have won a combined 53% of their games. The Knicks have the best record but have been playing the worst competition.

You can't call something a snapshot when it's based on overall strength of schedule and overall margin of victory, as well as applying those standards to the last 10 games or 25% of the season.  If you do, the word snapshot ceases to have any particular meaning.

And coming into last night, the Knicks had won 8 in a row while the 6ers had only won 2 in straight.  It's easy to see which was the "hotter" team.

Mike

[BballTim]

By definition, something that's takes into account strength of schedule, margin of victory and record over the last 10 games is not "looking at current snapshots".

  First of all, there's no truth to that statement at all.

  Secondly, what I was saying was it's more a measure of how a team is performing right now or at least very recently as opposed to how it's performed over the course of the season.

Nor is it measuring the "hotter" team, because then neither the 6ers or Rockets would be ranked over the Knicks, which they are.

  I'm sure that depends on how you define "hotter". Over the last 10 games, the Knicks are 8-2 with an average margin of 5.4 vs teams that have won a combined 42% of their games. The 76ers are 7-3 with an average margin of 8.5 vs teams that have won a combined 47% of their games. The Rockets are 6-4 with an average margin of 3.8 vs teams that have won a combined 53% of their games. The Knicks have the best record but have been playing the worst competition.

You can't call something a snapshot when it's based on overall strength of schedule and overall margin of victory, as well as applying those standards to the last 10 games or 25% of the season.  If you do, the word snapshot ceases to have any particular meaning.

  The word snapshot applies to how you're playing at this point in time, as opposed to how you were playing last month or last year or how good your overall play has been this year. His formula does look at overall play but it's weighted much more heavily towards recent play.

And coming into last night, the Knicks had won 8 in a row while the 6ers had only won 2 in straight.  It's easy to see which was the "hotter" team.

Mike

  Ok, I can do that too. The 76ers won last night and the Knicks lost. It's easy to see who's "hotter".

  Or, for the sake of argument, instead of defining "hotter" to be "how well they've played over whatever stretch of time I can find that supports my argument" we could go with how they've played over Hollinger's definition of recent play.

[Fafnir]

A few things:

1. Just because somebody rejects Hollinger's formula doesn't mean that they reject all statistical models. Hollinger's seems flawed, in part because it totally rejects H2H and winning percentage. Similarly, there are better measures of SOS than simply looking at opponent's winning percentage.

2. Hollinger's model may be based upon data rather than emotion, but "objective" doesn't mean" accurate". It's a formula created by a fallible man. It's like arguing that the BCS computers should determine the national champion, because they're" objective".

For point #1, though, in order to criticize this particular method for rejecting head to head and winning percentage, don't you have to provide some evidence that winning percentage and head to head matter significantly when trying to predict future results? I think those two criteria are rejected for a reason: they have historically had little to do with what happens in the future relative to scoring margin. In order to add variables to the equation, there would have to be a consistent correlation of those criteria to the outcomes trying to be predicted.

Edit-I agree with the SOS criteria though. I've actually written him a couple times to see if he'd address this in a PERdiem, but he hasn't. I think it is absolutely flawed that he used this system that explicitly ignores winning percentage on the basis that it is a poor predictor of true ability, yet uses win percentage to formulate SOS! I basically asked him why he doesn't use "opponent margin of victory" instead of SOS if margin of victory is a better surrogate for team strength than win percentage. Or, if power rankings is really a good measure of how well a team is playing at a given time, why couldn't you replace SOS with "Opponent Power Ranking at time of game?" Seems like both would be better.

If you want regressions that use margin of victory for strength of schedule wayne winston's numbers and SRS both do that (IIRC)

[GreenEnvy]

I haven't read this entire thread, but someone please explain to me how the Heat are ahead of the C's.

The way I see it, the Celtics have the better overall record. They have the same record in the last 10, but the Celtics are riding a longer winning streak. The Celtics' SOS both for the season and in the L10 are significantly better. ALL of that favors Boston. The only thing that favors Miami is Point Differential. Marginally better for the season, and a decent difference in the L10.

Add in the fact that the C's played more road games than home and the Heat played 4 more home games, there is no reason they should even be close, let alone ahead of them. And of course H2H matchups mean nothing.


Whatever, Hollinger should be employed by a University, not a Sports Network.