Abacus’ 18-week “Chalk-dust” Ratings (and a few etcetera’s)

Photo by Kathryn Riley/Getty Images

Brad Stevens and his Boston Celtics reached this season’s Three-quarter Pole this past Tuesday with the second of consecutive overtime home losses, the coach uncharacteristically expressing criticism of his squad’s performance.

AP Photo/Mary Schwalm

He had ample cause … especially when you consider these numbers. In their first 59 games, Boston’s opposition had misfired on 178 “rebound-able” foul shots and re-acquired but 18 of them with an Offensive Rebound (player or team)

The victorious Nets missed seven “live-ball” free throws and regained possession FOUR times, converting two of those additional scoring opportunities – the difference in the ballgame? (You decide.)

As for the Houston defeat three nights earlier – the C’s finished with 51 conversions (39 FG’s + 12 FT conversions) and 7 “stripes” (13 3FG’s “minus” 6 missed FT’s) for an “expected” 109 points. The Rockets produced 48 conversions (41 FG’s + 7 FTC’s) and 11 “stripes” (15 3FG’s “minus” 4 missed FT’s), an expectation of 107 points. (Alas, the Rockets’ FOUR “and-1” opportunities – which don’t boost the Conversion Count but do count on the scoreboard – trumped expectation.)

[And though it falls outside the timeline of this analysis, the theme of improbability maintained through Friday night’s encounter with Utah, in which the C’s lost despite holding a numerical edge in both Total Rebounds and Turnovers.]

Nevertheless – and at the risk of being labeled a “homer” – Boston’s seasonal statistical record sits them atop my Algebraic rankings … seems as if Brad’s boys are adhering to his mantra of “Make the right play on the next possession” with a fair degree of frequency.

These ranking reflect all play through and including games of Tuesday March 3. The Grading Scale is explained below.

Flow: +2.32 – No. 5 overall         Striping: +0.99 – No. 4 overall
SPOR-t: +48 – No. 3 overall        Road Swag: +11 – No. 3* overall



Flow: +3.49 – No. 3 overall        Striping: +0.76 – No. 7 overall
SPOR-t: +27 – No. 7 overall       Road Swag: +11 – No. 3* overall



Flow: +7.38 – No. 1 overall         Striping: -0.93 – No. 26 overall
SPOR-t: +89 – No. 1 overall        Road Swag: +22 – No. 1 overall



Flow: +2.31 – No. 6 overall        Striping: +0.24 – No. 13 overall
SPOR-t: +35 – No. 6 overall       Road Swag: +11 – No. 3* overall



Flow: +4.52 – No. 2 overall        Striping: -0.75 – No. 23 overall
SPOR-t: +80 – No. 2 overall       Road Swag: +18 – No. 2 overall



Flow: +0.77 – No. 11 overall       Striping: +0.86 – No. 5 overall
SPOR-t: +40 – No. 5 overall        Road Swag: +7 – No. 10* overall





Flow: +0.85 – No. 10 overall        Striping: +1.65 – No. 2 overall
SPOR-t: +12 – No. 12 overall       Road Swag: +7 – No. 10* overall


Flow: +1.16 – No. 9 overall         Striping: -0.05 – No. 19 overall
SPOR-t: +41 – No. 4 overall        Road Swag: +9 – No. 7* overall



Flow: +0.37 – No. 15 overall        Striping: +1.77 – No. 1 overall
SPOR-t: -17 – No. 20 overall        Road Swag: +10 – No. 6 overall



Flow: +0.72 – No. 12 overall       Striping: +0.83 – No. 6 overall
SPOR-t: +1 – No. 16 overall        Road Swag: +8 – No. 9 overall


Flow: +1.46 – No. 8 overall          Striping: -0.04 – No. 18 overall
SPOR-t: +16 – No. 10 overall       Road Swag: +9 – No. 7* overall



Flow: +2.38 – No. 4 overall          Striping: -0.37 – No. 20 overall
SPOR-t: +15 – No. 11 overall       Road Swag: +6 – No. 12 overall





Flow: +0.70 – No. 13 overall         Striping: -0.80 – No. 24 overall
SPOR-t: +19 – No. 8* overall        Road Swag: -1 – No. 14 overall



Flow: -0.80 – No. 19 overall         Striping: +0.30 – No. 12 overall
SPOR-t: +3 – No. 14* overall       Road Swag: -2 – No. 15* overall



Flow: -0.87 – No. 20 overall         Striping: +0.48 – No. 9 overall
SPOR-t: +3 – No. 14* overall       Road Swag: -5 – No. 20 overall



Flow: -0.66 – No. 18 overall         Striping: +0.37 – No. 11 overall
SPOR-t: -26 – No. 22 overall        Road Swag: -2 – No. 15* overall


Flow: +2.07 – No. 7 overall         Striping: -1.12 – No. 27 overall
SPOR-t: -22 – No. 21 overall       Road Swag: +4 – No. 13 overall


Flow: +0.23 – No. 16 overall       Striping: +0.19 – No. 14 overall
SPOR-t: 0 – No. 17 overall          Road Swag: -9 – No. 23 overall





Flow: -0.93 – No. 21 overall         Striping: +0.07 – No. 16 overall
SPOR-t: -10 – No. 19 overall        Road Swag: -2 – No. 15* overall


Flow: +0.47 – No. 14 overall      Striping: -0.88 – No. 25 overall
SPOR-t: -3 – No. 18 overall        Road Swag: -3 – No. 18 overall



Flow: +0.13 – No. 17 overall       Striping: -1.15 – No. 28 overall
SPOR-t: +9 – No. 13 overall        Road Swag: -4 – No. 19 overall



Flow: -3.00 – No. 26 overall         Striping: +1.11 – No. 3 overall
SPOR-t: -27 – No. 23 overall        Road Swag: -11 – No. 24* overall



Flow: -2.07 – No. 23 overall          Striping: +0.19 – No. 15 overall
SPOR-t: -41 – No. 25* overall       Road Swag: -7 – No. 21 overall



Flow: -1.74 – No. 22 overall          Striping: -2.18 – No. 30 overall
SPOR-t: +19 – No. 8* overall        Road Swag: -11 – No. 24* overall




Flow: -3.28 – No. 28 overall        Striping: +0.43 – No. 10 overall
SPOR-t: -39 – No. 24 overall       Road Swag: -11 – No. 24* overall



Flow: -2.19 – No. 24 overall          Striping: +0.06 – No. 17 overall
SPOR-t: -41 – No. 25* overall       Road Swag: -11 – No. 24* overall


Flow: -4.94 – No. 30 overall         Striping: +0.73 – No. 8 overall
SPOR-t: -80 – No. 30 overall        Road Swag: -13 – No. 28 overall



Flow: -3.11 – No. 27 overall          Striping: -0.74 – No. 22 overall
SPOR-t: -62 – No. 29 overall         Road Swag: -8 – No. 22 overall



Flow: -4.89 – No. 29 overall          Striping: -0.71 – No. 21 overall
SPOR-t: -44 – No. 27 overall         Road Swag: -16 – No. 29 overall



Flow: -2.71 – No. 25 overall          Striping: -1.33 – No. 29 overall
SPOR-t: -55 – No. 28 overall         Road Swag: -17 – No. 30 overall


The Grading Scale

“Flow”: this calculation puts a number to a team’s unsuccessful possessions (i.e. the other guys’ “stops”). Just take their missed field goals (attempts minus makes), subtract the offensive rebounds, and then add the turnovers. The “scores” represent per-game performance.

“Striping”: this calculation measures the impact of missed free throws and made treys. By subtracting the former from the latter [3’s minus missed FT’s], we identify a team’s gain or loss in points through “specialty shooting.” Again the “scores” are per-game. (A further division by two converts “points” to “conversions” – thus they can be combined with the “Flow” score.)

"Road Swag": this calculation is a way to measure a team’s grit and savvy through its ability to defend its home court and win on the road, a simple calculation (road wins minus home losses) for generally reliable info.

“SPOR-t”: SPOR-t stands for “Shooting Plus Offensive Rebounds minus turnovers.” Add a team’s FG percentage and its offensive rebounding percentage (o. boards divided by the sum of those o. boards and the opposition's d. boards). Then subtract the percentage of a team’s possessions lost to turnovers. For example, a team shoots field goals at a .488 clip, offensive rebounds at a rate of .199, and commits a turnover on .143 of its possessions. So its SPOR-t is (488+199-143) or 544. Once again, our measurement will be the difference between the SPOR-t scores of a team and its opposition.

We’ll rank the teams from 1 to 30 in all criteria and simply add up the rankings. Low score wins, naturally.


Abacus Revelation for the Road

Just over one of every four NBA games (26.6%) this season has involved at least one team playing the second night of a back-to-back in 2019-20 … believe it or not, one of these games is more likely to produce a close contest decided by five points or fewer than a match-up of two rested teams.