NBA 2014-15 12-week Power Ratings

Ratings reflect play through Monday January 19.

(The Criteria is explained below.)

My ratings for the season's second quarter can be viewed here.

No. 1 Golden State Warriors (5.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 2

9-week Abacus rating: 1

6-week Abacus rating: 1

3-week Abacus rating: 5]

33-6, .846; 1^st in Pacific Division / 1^st seed / 1^st overall

KK:  +14; (15 Road Wins – 1 Home Loss) / No. 1 overall (tied)

CQ:  +45; (.515 [4^th] - .470 [1^st]) / No. 1 overall

SPOR-t:  +50; (573 [8^th] – 523 [3^rd]) / No. 2 overall

No. 2 Dallas Mavericks (16.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 8

9-week Abacus rating: 4

6-week Abacus rating: 3

3-week Abacus rating: 2]

29-13, .690; 2^nd in Southwest Division / 4^th seed / 5^th overall (tied)*

KK:  +9; (15 Road Wins – 6 Home Losses) / No. 3 overall

CQ:  +30; (.523 [1^st] - .493 [14^th]) / No. 2 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  +28; (592 [3^rd] – 564 [19^nd]) / No. 5 overall

No. 2 Memphis Grizzlies (16.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 3

9-week Abacus rating: 3

6-week Abacus rating: 2

3-week Abacus rating: 1]

29-12, .707; 1^st in Southwest Division / 3^rd seed / 4^th overall

KK:  +8; (13 Road Wins – 5 Home Loss) / No. 4 overall (tied)

CQ:  +29; (.514 [5^th] - .485 [9^th]) / No. 4 overall

SPOR-t:  +38; (579 [4^th] – 541 [9^th]) / No. 4 overall

No. 4 Washington Wizards (19.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 10

9-week Abacus rating: 4

6-week Abacus rating: 5

3-week Abacus rating: 4]

29-13, .690; 2^nd in Southeast Division / 2^nd seed / 5^th overall (tied)*

KK:  +6; (11 Road Wins – 5 Home Losses) / No. 7 overall (tied)

CQ:  +26; (.509 [8^th] - .483 [7^th]) / No. 5 overall

SPOR-t:  +55; (575 [7^th] – 520 [2^nd]) / No. 1 overall

No. 5 Atlanta Hawks (22)

[12-week ESPN rating: 1

9-week Abacus rating: 8

6-week Abacus rating: 13

3-week Abacus rating: 15]

34-8, .810; 1^st in Southeast Division / 1^st seed / 2^nd overall

KK:  +14; (17 Road Wins – 3 Home Losses) / No. 1 overall (tied)

CQ:  +30; (.501 [11^th] - .471 [2^nd]) / No. 2 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  +4; (533 [24^th] – 529 [7^th]) / No. 16 overall

No. 6 Toronto Raptors (34.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 13

9-week Abacus rating: 2

6-week Abacus rating: 7

3-week Abacus rating: 7]

27-14, .659; 1^st in Atlantic Division / 3^rd seed / 9^th overall

KK:  +4; (11 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 11 overall

CQ:  +11; (.518 [3^rd] - .507 [24^th]) / No. 8 overall

SPOR-t:  +24; (600 [1^st] – 576 [25^th]) / No. 6 overall (tied)

No. 7 San Antonio Spurs (35.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 5

9-week Abacus rating: 11

6-week Abacus rating: 4

3-week Abacus rating: 10]

26-16, .619; 4^th in Southwest Division / 7^th seed / 11^th overall

KK:  +5; (11 Road Wins – 6 Home Losses) / No. 9 overall (tied)

CQ:  +15; (.497 [16^th] - .482 [6^th]) / No. 7 overall

SPOR-t:  +22; (545 [21^st] – 523 [3^rd]) / No. 8 overall

No. 8 Houston Rockets (37)

[12-week ESPN rating: 6

9-week Abacus rating: 10

6-week Abacus rating: 9

3-week Abacus rating: 3]

29-13, .690; 2^nd in Southwest Division / 4^th seed / 5^th overall (tied)*

KK:  +7; (14 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 6 overall

CQ:  +4; (.483 [24^th] - .479 [4^th]) / No. 14 overall

SPOR-t:  +18; (550 [20^th] – 532 [8^th]) / No. 11 overall

No. 8 Los Angeles Clippers (37)

[12-week ESPN rating: 7

9-week Abacus rating: 9

6-week Abacus rating: 8

3-week Abacus rating: 19]

28-14, .667; 2^nd in Pacific Division / 6^th seed / 8^th overall

KK:  +3; (10 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 12 overall (tied)*

CQ:  +22; (.521 [2^nd] - .499 [18^th]) / No. 6 overall

SPOR-t:  +20; (564 [12^th] – 544 [11^th]) / No.  10 overall

No. 10 Portland Trail Blazers (37.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 4

9-week Abacus rating: 6

6-week Abacus rating: 5

3-week Abacus rating: 9]

31-11, .738; 1^st in Northwest Division / 2^nd seed / 3^rd overall

KK:  +8; (12 Road Wins – 4 Home Losses) / No. 4 overall (tied)

CQ:  +1; (.487 [20^th] - .486 [10^th]) / No. 15 overall

SPOR-t:  +5; (553 [18^th] – 548 [12^th]) / No. 15 overall

No. 11 Oklahoma City Thunder (42.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 12

9-week Abacus rating: 14

6-week Abacus rating: 22

3-week Abacus rating: 28]

20-20, .500; 2^nd in Northwest Division / 9^th seed / 15^th overall

KK:  +1; (8 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 15 overall (tied)

CQ:  +10; (.495 [18^th] - .485 [9^th]) / No. 9 overall

SPOR-t:  +47; (570 [11^th] – 523 [3^rd]) / No. 3 overall

No. 12 Chicago Bulls (47.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 11

9-week Abacus rating: 7

6-week Abacus rating: 11

3-week Abacus rating: 8]

27-16, .628; 1^st in Central Division / 4^th seed / 10^th overall

KK:  +5; (15 Road Wins – 10 Home Losses) / No. 9 overall (tied)

CQ:  +9; (.507 [9^th] - .498 [17^th]) / No. 10 overall

SPOR-t:  -1; (576 [6^th] – 577 [26^th]) / No. 18 overall

No. 13 New Orleans Pelicans (52.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 14

9-week Abacus rating: 13

6-week Abacus rating: 14

3-week Abacus rating: 11]

20-21, .488; 5^th in Southwest Division / 10^th seed / 16^th overall

KK:  +3; (8 Road Wins – 5 Home Losses) / No. 12 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -1; (.512 [6^th] - .513 [27^th]) / No. 16 overall (tied)*

SPOR-t:  +24; (598 [2^nd] – 574 [23^rd]) / No. 6 overall (tied)

No. 14 Phoenix Suns (57.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 9

9-week Abacus rating: 15

6-week Abacus rating: 15

3-week Abacus rating: 18]

25-18, .581; 3^rd in Pacific Division / 8^th seed / 12^th overall

KK:  +6; (13 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 7 overall (tied)

CQ:  -1; (.500 [12^th] - .501 [19^th]) / No. 16 overall (tied)*

SPOR-t:  -5; (562 [14^th] – 567 [21^st]) / No. 21 overall

No. 15 Milwaukee Bucks (58.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 17

9-week Abacus rating: 16

6-week Abacus rating: 16

3-week Abacus rating: 13]

21-20, .512; 3^rd in Central Division / 6^th seed / 14^th overall

KK:  +3; (12 Road Wins – 9 Home Losses) / No. 12 overall (tied)*

CQ:  +6; (.486 [21^st] - .480 [5^th]) / No. 12 overall

SPOR-t:  -3; (539 [22^nd] – 542 [10^th]) / No. 19 overall (tied)

No. 16 Charlotte Hornets (64)

[12-week ESPN rating: 19

9-week Abacus rating: 24

6-week Abacus rating: 24

3-week Abacus rating: 21]

17-25, .405; 4^th in Southeast Division / 9^th seed / 20^th overall

KK:  -6; (7 Road Wins – 13 Home Losses) / No. 24 overall

CQ:  +7; (.485 [23^rd] - .478 [3^th]) / No. 11 overall

SPOR-t:  +23; (534 [23^rd] – 511 [1^st]) / No. 9 overall

No. 17 Cleveland Cavaliers (67.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 15

9-week Abacus rating: 12

6-week Abacus rating: 10

3-week Abacus rating: 12]

22-20, .524; 2^nd in Central Division / 5^th seed / 13^th overall

KK:  +1; (10 Road Wins – 9 Home Losses) / No. 15 overall (tied)

CQ:  -1; (.506 [10^th] - .507 [22^nd]) / No. 16 overall (tied)*

SPOR-t:  -8; (577 [5^th] – 585 [28^th]) / No. 22 overall

No. 18 Denver Nuggets (72)

[12-week ESPN rating: 23

9-week Abacus rating: 19

6-week Abacus rating: 17

3-week Abacus rating: 24]

18-23, .439; 3^rd in Northwest Division / 11^th seed / 18^th overall

KK:  -3; (6 Road Wins – 9 Home Losses) / No. 18 overall

CQ:  -12; (.495 [17^th] - .507 [23^rd]) / No. 23 overall

SPOR-t:  +8; (564 [12^th] – 556 [14^th]) / No. 13 overall

No.19 Sacramento Kings (73)

[12-week ESPN rating: 22

9-week Abacus rating: 17

6-week Abacus rating: 12

3-week Abacus rating: 6]

16-25, .390; 4^th in Pacific Division / 12^th seed / 21^st overall

KK:  -8; (6 Road Wins – 14 Home Losses) / No. 25 overall

CQ:  +5; (.511 [7^th] - .506 [21^st]) / No. 13 overall

SPOR-t:  +6; (572 [9^th] – 566 [20^th]) / No. 14 overall

No. 20 Detroit Pistons (76)

[12-week ESPN rating: 16

9-week Abacus rating: 26

6-week Abacus rating: 29

3-week Abacus rating: 27]

16-26, .381; 4^th in Central Division / 10^th seed / 22^nd overall

KK:  -5; (10 Road Wins – 15 Home Losses) / No. 21 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -7; (.485 [22^nd] - .492 [12^th]) / No. 20 overall

SPOR-t:  +9; (557 [17^th] – 548 [12^th]) / No. 12 overall

No. 21 Miami Heat (79)

[12-week ESPN rating: 18

9-week Abacus rating: 23

6-week Abacus rating: 21

3-week Abacus rating: 14]

18-22, .450; 3^rd in Southeast Division / 7^th seed / 17^th overall

KK:  -1; (11 Road Wins – 12 Home Losses) / No. 17 overall

CQ:  -5; (.498 [14^th] - .503 [20^th]) / No. 19 overall

SPOR-t:  -43; (525 [27^th] – 568 [22^nd]) / No. 26 overall

No. 22 Indiana Pacers (84.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 25

9-week Abacus rating: 21

6-week Abacus rating: 23

3-week Abacus rating: 23]

15-28, .349; 5^th in Central Division / 11^th seed / 23^rd overall

KK:  -4 (7 Road Wins – 11 Home Loss) / No. 19 overall (tied)

CQ:  -18; (.472 [28^th] - .490 [11^th]) / No. 25 overall

SPOR-t:  +3; (530 [26^th] – 527 [6^th]) / No. 17 overall

No. 23 Utah Jazz (86.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 20

9-week Abacus rating: 22

6-week Abacus rating: 25

3-week Abacus rating: 22]

14-27, .341; 4^th in Northwest Division / 13^th seed / 24^th overall

KK:  -5; (7 Road Wins – 12 Home Losses) / No. 21 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -9; (.498 [11^th] - .507 [28^th]) / No. 21 overall

SPOR-t:  -3; (571 [10^th] – 574 [23^rd]) / No. 19 overall (tied)

No. 24 Brooklyn Nets (88)

[12-week ESPN rating: 24

9-week Abacus rating: 18

6-week Abacus rating: 19

3-week Abacus rating: 15]

17-24, .415; 2^nd in Atlantic Division / 8^th seed / 19^th overall

KK:  -5; (9 Road Wins – 14 Home Losses) / No. 21 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -10; (.483 [25^th] - .493 [15^th]) / No. 22 overall

SPOR-t:  -33; (523 [28^th] – 556 [14^th]) / No. 25 overall

No. 25 Boston Celtics (99.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 28

9-week Abacus rating: 19

6-week Abacus rating: 18

3-week Abacus rating: 17]

16-27, .372; 3^rd in Atlantic Division / 13^th seed / 26^th overall

KK:  -9; (4 Road Wins – 13 Home Losses) / No. 26 overall (tied)

CQ:  -14; (.483 [26^th] - .497 [16^th]) / No. 24 overall

SPOR-t:  -10; (552 [19^th] – 562 [18^th]) / No. 23 overall

No. 26 Orlando Magic (99.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 21

9-week Abacus rating: 24

6-week Abacus rating: 20

3-week Abacus rating: 20]

15-29, .341; 5^th in Southeast Division / 12^th seed / 25^th overall

KK:  -4; (10 Road Wins – 14 Home Losses) / No. 19 overall (tied)

CQ:  -30; (.477 [27^th] - .507 [26^th]) / No. 27 overall

SPOR-t:  -53; (505 [29^th] – 558 [16^th]) / No. 28

No. 27 Los Angeles Lakers (103.5)

[12-week ESPN rating: 26

9-week Abacus rating: 27

6-week Abacus rating: 26

3-week Abacus rating: 29]

12-30, .286; 5^th in Pacific Division / 14^th seed / 27^th overall

KK:  -9; (6 Road Wins – 15 Home Losses) / No. 26 overall (tied)

CQ:  -21; (.499 [13^th] - .520 [29^th]) / No. 26 overall

SPOR-t:  -23; (560 [15^th] – 583 [27^th]) / No. 24 overall

No. 28 Minnesota Timberwolves (113)

[12-week ESPN rating: 29

9-week Abacus rating: 28

6-week Abacus rating: 27

3-week Abacus rating: 26]

7-33, .175; 5^th in Northwest Division / 15^th seed / 29^th overall

KK:  -12; (4 Road Wins – 16 Home Losses) / No. 29 overall

CQ:  -31; (.491 [15^th] - .522 [29^th]) / No. 28 overall

SPOR-t:  -52; (560 [15^th] – 612 [30^th]) / No. 27 overall

No. 29 Philadelphia 76ers (115)

[12-week ESPN rating: 27

9-week Abacus rating: 20

6-week Abacus rating: 30

3-week Abacus rating: 30]

8-33, .195; 4^th in Atlantic Division / 14^th seed / 28^th overall

KK:  -11; (5 Road Wins – 16 Home Losses) / No. 28 overall

CQ:  -43; (.450 [30^th] - .493 [13^th]) / No. 29 overall

SPOR-t:  -88; (471 [30^th] – 559 [17^th]) / No. 30 overall

No. 30 New York Knicks (119)

[12-week ESPN rating: 30

9-week Abacus rating: 29

6-week Abacus rating: 28

3-week Abacus rating: 25]

6-36, .143; 5^th in Atlantic Division / 15^th seed / 30^th overall

KK:  -15; (2 Road Wins – 17 Home Losses) / No. 30 overall

CQ:  -46; (.470 [29^th] - .516 [28^th]) / No. 30 overall

SPOR-t:  -64; (533 [24^th] – 597 [29^th]) / No. 29 overall

Power Ratings --The Measurement Instrument

Our team-ranking tool utilizes four elements. Two scales are based solely on team wins and losses; the others are measures of the efficiency of team performance in comparison with the competition. First, we’ll simply use win-loss record irrespective of conference.

The second criterion will be the difference between a team’s road wins and its home losses. Since this cute little metric is said to be a personal favorite of veteran NBA coach George Karl, let’s call this the Karl Kount (KK).

Criterion No. 3, Conversion Quotient (CQ), involves the rate at which a team converts its possessions into a successful field goals or free throw attempts. Like the KK, the computation is simple subtraction—a team’s rate of offensive efficiency minus that of the opponent.

Lastly, please allow Abacus to introduce the “SPOR-t” score. 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. 

World Series 2014: One Base Shy, Too Much Bumgarner

As the four most gratifying words to the ear of a die-hard baseball fan -- "pitchers and catchers report" -- rapidly approach, let's take a look back at last season's World Series. (Alas, and to the chagrin of Giant fans everywhere, the fear expressed in the conclusion of this piece has indeed come to pass.)

The San Francisco Giants’ Madison Bumgarner was the break-out star of the 2014 World Series – or MLB Finals, as ESPN’s Keith Olbermann has taken to calling it. The big country boy has been a mainstay, indeed a work-horse, in Bruce Bochy’s rotation now for four seasons, logging 129 regular-season starts, roughly half of the seven-inning variety. The acclaim he is receiving is bought and paid for.

As eye-popping as was the performance of the Giants’ lefty, though, the real winner to come out of this post-season was the game of Baseball itself, particularly as represented by the “small-ball” style of the frumpy runners-up from the Midwest. Ned Yost’s No-Name Kansas City Royals rode the tripartite mantra of Pitching (particularly a shut-down bullpen crew), Defense and “Get ‘em on, get ‘em over, get ‘em in” to its best finish in two decades.

Regal Reality seemed to have set in, however, against battle-tested Jon Lester and the Oakland A’s in the Wild Card play-in game. But a miraculous rally saved the day and ignited a clean sweep through the American League side of the playoff bracket. Bumgarner’s gem in Game 1 of the Fall Classic stemmed the tide only temporarily, as consecutive KC triumphs snatched back the home-field advantage, which held true until Game 7.

Maybe in a case of role reversal, the Giants stole a page from Yost’s playbook in forging an early 3-2 lead in that decisive game. For example, just prior to scoring what would prove to be the championship run from third base on Mike Morse’s fourth-inning single to right, Pablo Sandoval had advanced to third on an outfield fly – TO LEFT. The Panda’s rather a big boy to be executing such daring base-running, eh? SF’s first two runs had been scored on sacrifice flies … indeed, four of the twelve base advancements it took to plate three runners were the result of a tag-up.

Put the ball in play and good things can happen!

During the second inning of a “do-or-die” Game 6, a dribbler off the bat of speedy KC shortstop Alcides Escobar made grizzled vet Jake Peavy and young first baseman Brandon Belt look like a couple of T-ballers. The infield single (no, fielder’s choice; yes, single again) begat a seven-run inning, a 10-0 blowout and that Game 7.

Certainly, Iron Man Bumgarner’s long relief creates the enduring impression for this Series. But Baseball’s extraordinary capacity for innovation had saved up one final edge-of-your-seat moment for us – on a play that could have laid waste to MadBum’s chunk of posterity.

‘Twas fitting that this one ended with the tying run a mere 90’ away. And the manner by which Alex Gordon got himself into that position soon had the irascibly witty Olbermann invoking the likes of legendary Giant goats Fred Snodgrass (he of the “muff”) and Fred Merkle (he of the “boner”).

The Royals’ wonderfully athletic left-fielder whistled an 0-1 slider right up the middle on a line, under most circumstances a playable, if not catchable, ball for a proficient center-fielder like Gregor Blanco. But the Giants were utilizing the so-called “No Doubles” alignment as well as playing the left-handed hitting Gordon to pull. Blanco got himself into No Man’s Land, and the ball skipped through to the wall. Left-fielder Juan Perez complicated matters by mishandling the ball before getting it to shortstop Brandon Crawford in short left field.

Over and above the misjudgment and poor ball-handling, this outfield play is fundamentally un-sound. The corner outfielder is expected to serve as the backer-upper, not the chaser-downer. What in the world was Perez thinking? That he had a play on the ball? Or did he figure Blanco had it all the way and was guilty of pre-mature jockularity, as seemed to be the case with the Giants’ battery at that point in time?

Either way, and notwithstanding the error properly charged to Blanco, Perez’s mental miscue cost at least one base, if not two. The Keystone Kops component of it all was advanced by the pundits who were chastising Gordon and third-base coach Mike Jirschole for not further testing the Giants’ capacity for foible by trying for the game evener right then and there.

Of course, such base-running judgment would be the epitome of folly. No way Gordon could have navigated those final 90’ more quickly than Crawford can throw a ball 120’ or so. In prior baseball eras, one might factor into this decision the likelihood that Gordon, who’s built like a blocking back, could have jarred the ball loose from the grasp of catcher Buster Posey. But such collisions have been legislated from the rulebook, if not quite completely yet from the instinctive nature of aggressive ballplayers.

A payoff (i.e. tie game, extra innings, no more Bumgarner) on such a long-shot required another defensive blunder (i.e. off-line or delayed throw, another player out-of-place). Methinks I recall a famous line from “Dirty Harry” that fits such a scenario. Of course, Det. Callahan’s sentiment might just as easily have applied to the prospects of Salvador Perez’s subsequent at-bat. And therein lies the dilemma that was facing Gordon and particularly Jirschole in that most tense of moments.

There are a variety of ways by which a base-runner can advance from third to home: a batted ball in play, a balk, a pitch that goes awry, even a straight steal of home ala Jackie Robinson. All things considered, holding the runner was the only move to make, and both runner and base-coach seemed to resign themselves to this inevitability. (Gordon, in violation of youth ball gospel, admitted to watching the ball while running.)

Conceivably, the Royals could have bluffed Crawford into making a hurried throw without actually sending Gordon. An aggressive rounding of third may have induced such a reaction. But Jirschole put the brakes on Gordon well before reaching the bag.

Kinda ironic that on such a crucial play, two teams who had made their 2014 mark with a “balls-out” approach ultimately went conservative – the Giants with their defensive alignment and the Royals (who uncharacteristically attempted only two stolen bases in the whole series) with some too casual base-running.

In the end, Madison’s magnificence made it all a moot point by inducing the least stressful out in the sport, a foul pop. And let’s hope that Kung Fu Panda’s last act as a San Francisco Giant is NOT falling on his keister.

NBA 2014 9-week power Ratings

No. 1 Golden State Warriors (10)

[9-week ESPN rating: 2

6-week Abacus rating: 1

3-week Abacus rating: 5]

24-5, .828; 1^st in Pacific Division / 1^st seed / 1^st overall

KK:  +12; (13 Road Wins – 1 Home Loss) / No. 1 overall

CQ:  +31; (.503 [12^th] - .472 [1^st]) / No. 3 overall

SPOR-t:  +31; (556 [17^th] – 525 [2^nd]) / No. 4 overall (tied)*

Abacus Revelation: The Warriors rank No. 1 in both FG offense and FG defense.

No. 2 Toronto Raptors (14)

[9-week ESPN rating: 5

6-week Abacus rating: 7

3-week Abacus rating: 7]

24-7, .774; 1^st in Atlantic Division / 1^st seed / 3^rd overall

KK:  +7; (10 Road Wins – 3 Home Losses) / No. 4 overall

CQ:  +28; (.531 [1^st] - .503 [22^nd]) / No. 5 overall

SPOR-t:  +45; (617 [1^st] – 572 [21^st]) / No. 2 overall

No. 3 Memphis Grizzlies (17.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 7

6-week Abacus rating: 2

3-week Abacus rating: 1]

22-8, .733; 1^st in Southwest Division / 3^rd seed / 4^th overall (tied)*

KK:  +6; (10 Road Wins – 4 Home Loss) / No. 5 overall (tied)

CQ:  +32; (.518 [3^rd] - .486 [8^th]) / No. 2 overall

SPOR-t:  +31; (584 [4^th] – 553 [13^th]) / No. 4 overall (tied)*

No. 4 Dallas Mavericks (20.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 8

6-week Abacus rating: 3

3-week Abacus rating: 2]

22-10, .688; 3^rd in Southwest Division / 5^th seed / 9^th overall

KK:  +5; (10 Road Wins – 5 Home Losses) / No. 7 overall (tied)

CQ:  +33; (.529 [2^nd] - .496 [16^th]) / No. 1 overall

SPOR-t:  +35; (609 [2^nd] – 574 [22^nd]) / No. 3 overall

No. 4 Washington Wizards (20.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 11

6-week Abacus rating: 5

3-week Abacus rating: 4]

22-8, .733; 1^st in Southeast Division / 2^nd seed / 4^th overall (tied)*

KK:  +4; (8 Road Wins – 4 Home Losses) / No. 9 overall (tied)**

CQ:  +29; (.510 [9^th] - .481 [4^th]) / No. 4 overall

SPOR-t:  +64; (578 [7^th] – 514 [1^st]) / No. 1 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Wizards are the league’s most accurate three-point shooting team.

No. 6 Portland Trail Blazers (22.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 3

6-week Abacus rating: 5

3-week Abacus rating: 9]

25-7, .781; 1^st in Northwest Division / 2^nd seed / 2^nd overall

KK:  +9; (11 Road Wins – 2 Home Losses) / No. 2 overall (tied)

CQ:  +9; (.493 [19^th] - .484 [6^th]) / No. 11 overall

SPOR-t:  +24; (565 [12^th] – 541 [6^th]) / No. 7 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Blazers are top five in both three-point shooting and three-point defense, No. 1 in the latter.

No. 7 Chicago Bulls (29)

[9-week ESPN rating: 1

6-week Abacus rating: 11

3-week Abacus rating: 8]

22-9, .710; 1^st in Central Division / 4^th seed / 7^th overall

KK:  +9; (14 Road Wins – 5 Home Losses) / No. 2 overall (tied)

CQ:  +20; (.513 [8^th] - .493 [12^th]) / No. 6 overall

SPOR-t:  +11; (577 [8^th] – 566 [20^th]) / No. 13 overall (tied)

No. 8 Atlanta Hawks (30)

[9-week ESPN rating: 4

6-week Abacus rating: 13

3-week Abacus rating: 15]

22-8, .733; 1^st in Southeast Division / 2^nd seed / 4^th overall (tied)*

KK:  +6; (9 Road Wins – 3 Home Losses) / No. 5 overall (tied)

CQ:  +17; (.495 [16^th] - .478 [3^rd]) / No. 7 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  +15; (525 [27^th] – 540 [8^th]) / No. 12 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Hawks boast the league’s third most efficient defense (.478).

No. 9 Los Angeles Clippers (36.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 10

6-week Abacus rating: 8

3-week Abacus rating: 19]

21-11, .656; 2^nd in Pacific Division / 6^th seed / 10^th overall

KK:  +4; (8 Road Wins – 4 Home Losses) / No. 9 overall (tied)**

CQ:  +17; (.518 [4^th] - .501 [19^th]) / No. 7 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  +21; (559 [15^th] – 540 [8^th]) / No.  8 overall (tied)

Abacus Revelation: The Clippers putrid offensive rebounding (No.26, .217) is offset by tgheir prevention of the same (No. 4, .231).

No. 10 Houston Rockets (39.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 6

6-week Abacus rating: 9

3-week Abacus rating: 3]

21-9, .700; 2^nd in Southwest Division / 4^th seed / 8^th overall

KK:  +5; (11 Road Wins – 6 Home Losses) / No. 7 overall (tied)

CQ:  +4; (.479 [28^th] - .475 [2^nd]) / No. 13 overall

SPOR-t:  +17; (543 [22^nd] – 526 [3^rd]) / No. 11 overall

Abacus Revelation: The league’s top scorer leads its 28^th most efficient offense. Hmm.

No. 11 San Antonio Spurs (40)

[9-week ESPN rating: 9

6-week Abacus rating: 4

3-week Abacus rating: 10]

19-13, .594; 4^th in Southwest Division / 7^th seed / 12^th overall

KK:  +4; (9 Road Wins – 5 Home Losses) / No. 9 overall (tied)**

CQ:  +16; (.501 [13^th] - .485 [7^th]) / No. 9 overall

SPOR-t:  +21; (549 [20^th] – 528 [5^th]) / No. 8 overall (tied)

No. 12 Cleveland Cavaliers (51)

[9-week ESPN rating: 15

6-week Abacus rating: 10

3-week Abacus rating: 12]

18-12, .600; 2^nd in Central Division / 5^th seed / 11^th overall

KK:  +1; (7 Road Wins – 6 Home Losses) / No. 15 overall

CQ:  +14; (.514 [7^th] - .500 [17^th]) / No. 10 overall

SPOR-t:  +5; (583 [5^th] – 578 [24^th]) / No. 15 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Cavaliers’ opposition has attempted the fewest free throws in the league.

No. 13 New Orleans Pelicans (52.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 13

6-week Abacus rating: 14

3-week Abacus rating: 11]

15-15, .500; 5^th in Southwest Division / 9^th seed / 14^th overall (tied)

KK:  +2; (6 Road Wins – 4 Home Losses) / No. 14 overall

CQ:  -1; (.515 [6^th] - .516 [27^th]) / No. 14 overall

SPOR-t:  +18; (600 [3^rd] – 582 [26^th]) / No. 10 overall

No. 14 Oklahoma City Thunder (58.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 14

6-week Abacus rating: 22

3-week Abacus rating: 28]

15-17, .469; 2^nd in Northwest Division / 10^th seed / 16^th overall

KK:  0; (7 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 16 overall (tied)

CQ:  -11; (.493 [17^th] - .482 [5^th]) / No. 21 overall

SPOR-t:  +31; (567 [11^th] – 536 [7^th]) / No. 4 overall (tied)*

Abacus Revelation: Through six weeks, the Thunder averaging 92.5 points per games; during weeks 7-9, they’ve posted 107.2.

No. 15 Phoenix Suns (62)

[9-week ESPN rating: 12

6-week Abacus rating: 15

3-week Abacus rating: 18]

18-14, .563; 3^rd in Pacific Division / 8^th seed / 13^th overall

KK:  +4; (11 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 9 overall (tied)**

CQ:  -10; (.493 [18^th] - .503 [21^st]) / No. 19 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  -11; (552 [19^th] – 563 [18^th]) / No. 19 overall

No. 16 Milwaukee Bucks (65)

[9-week ESPN rating: 16

6-week Abacus rating: 16

3-week Abacus rating: 13]

16-16, .500; 3^rd in Central Division / 6^th seed / 14^th overall (tied)

KK:  +3; (9 Road Wins – 6 Home Losses) / No. 13 overall

CQ:  -5; (.487 [23^rd] - .492 [11^th]) / No. 15 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  -17; (538 [23^rd] – 555 [14^th]) / No. 22 overall

No.17 Sacramento Kings (68)

[9-week ESPN rating: 18

6-week Abacus rating: 12

3-week Abacus rating: 6]

13-18, .419; 4^th in Pacific Division / 11^th seed / 19^th overall (tied)

KK:  -5; (5 Road Wins – 10 Home Losses) / No. 23 overall

CQ:  +7; (.517 [5^th] - .510 [23^rd]) / No. 12 overall

SPOR-t:  +11; (582 [6^th] – 571 [25^th]) / No. 13 overall (tied)

Abacus Revelation: It’s tough to consider the Kings playoff material when they have the fourth highest turnover rate and are dead last at forcing them.

No. 18 Brooklyn Nets (77)

[9-week ESPN rating: 21

6-week Abacus rating: 19

3-week Abacus rating: 15]

14-16, .467; 2^nd in Atlantic Division / 7^th seed / 17^th overall

KK:  -2; (6 Road Wins – 8 Home Losses) / No. 18 overall

CQ:  -7; (.487 [22^nd] - .494 [13^th]) / No. 17 overall

SPOR-t:  -31; (529 [25^th] – 560 [16^th]) / No. 25 overall

No. 19 Boston Celtics (79)

[9-week ESPN rating: 27

6-week Abacus rating: 18

3-week Abacus rating: 17]

10-18, .357; 3^rd in Atlantic Division / 10^th seed / 22^nd overall

KK:  -6; (3 Road Wins – 9 Home Losses) / No. 24 overall (tied)

CQ:  -5; (.490 [21^st] - .495 [15^th]) / No. 15 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  +3; (555 [18^th] – 552 [12^th]) / No. 16 overall (tied)*

No. 19 Denver Nuggets (79)

[9-week ESPN rating: 24

6-week Abacus rating: 17

3-week Abacus rating: 24]

13-18, .419; 3^rd in Northwest Division / 11^th seed / 19^th overall (tied)

KK:  -3; (4 Road Wins – 7 Home Losses) / No. 19 overall

CQ:  -20; (.491 [20^th] - .511 [25^th]) / No. 23 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  +3; (565 [12^th] – 562 [17^th]) / No. 16 overall (tied)*

Abacus Revelation: Denver’s opponents have attempted the most (879) free throws in the league.

No. 21 Indiana Pacers (86)

[9-week ESPN rating: 19

6-week Abacus rating: 23

3-week Abacus rating: 23]

11-21, .344; 4^th in Central Division / 11^th seed / 23^rd overall

KK:  -4 (5 Road Wins – 9 Home Loss) / No. 20 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -22; (.473 [29^th] - .495 [14^th]) / No. 25 overall

SPOR-t:  +3; (532 [24^th] – 529 [6^th]) / No. 16 overall (tied)*

Abacus Revelation: The Pacers rank in the top ten in field goal defense and defending the three-point shot.

No. 22 Utah Jazz (87)

[9-week ESPN rating: 20

6-week Abacus rating: 25

3-week Abacus rating: 22]

10-21, .323; 4^th in Northwest Division / 13^th seed / 24^th overall

KK:  -4; (5 Road Wins – 9 Home Losses) / No. 20 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -13; (.504 [11^th] - .517 [28^th]) / No. 22 overall

SPOR-t:  -12; (575 [10^th] – 587 [27^th]) / No. 20 overall

No. 23 Miami Heat (87.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 17

6-week Abacus rating: 21

3-week Abacus rating: 14]

14-18, .438; 3^rd in Southeast Division / 8^th seed / 18^th overall

KK:  -4; (8 Road Wins – 12 Home Losses) / No. 20 overall (tied)*

CQ:  -10; (.500 [14^th] - .510 [24^th]) / No. 19 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  -52; (523 [28^th] – 575 [23^rd]) / No. 29 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Heat force a turnover on one of six opponent possessions, fourth best in the league.

No. 24 Charlotte Hornets (92)

[9-week ESPN rating: 22

6-week Abacus rating: 24

3-week Abacus rating: 21]

10-22, .313; 5^th in Southeast Division / 12^th seed / 25^th overall

KK:  -8; (3 Road Wins – 11 Home Losses) / No. 26 overall

CQ:  -8; (.483 [24^th] - .491 [10^th]) / No. 18 overall

SPOR-t:  -21; (528 [26^th] – 526 [3^rd]) / No. 23 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Hornets are No. 1 in limiting opponent offensive rebounds (.197) and in taking care of the ball (.117).

No. 24 Orlando Magic (92)

[9-week ESPN rating: 23

6-week Abacus rating: 20

3-week Abacus rating: 20]

13-21, .382; 4^th in Southeast Division / 9^th seed / 21^st overall

KK:  0; (9 Road Wins – 9 Home Losses) / No. 16 overall (tied)

CQ:  -24; (.479 [27^th] - .503 [20^th]) / No. 26 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  -47; (513 [29^th] – 555 [14^th]) / No. 28 overall

Abacus Revelation: After a shaky start, the Magic have placed in the top five in three-point shooting for several weeks now.

No. 26 Detroit Pistons (99)

[9-week ESPN rating: 25

6-week Abacus rating: 29

3-week Abacus rating: 27]

7-23, .233; 5^th in Central Division / 13^th seed / 27^th overall

KK:  -9; (4 Road Wins – 13 Home Losses) / No. 27 overall (tied)

CQ:  -20; (.481 [25^th] - .501 [18^th]) / No. 23 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  -16; (548 [21^st] – 564 [19^th]) / No. 21 overall

Abacus Revelation: Last season’s best offensive rebounding team has slipped to ninth.

No. 27 Los Angeles Lakers (101)

[9-week ESPN rating: 26

6-week Abacus rating: 26

3-week Abacus rating: 29]

9-22, .290; 5^th in Pacific Division / 14^th seed / 26^th overall

KK:  -6; (5 Road Wins – 11 Home Losses) / No. 24 overall (tied)

CQ:  -24; (.505 [10^th] - .529 [30^th]) / No. 26 overall (tied)

SPOR-t:  -22; (577 [8^th] – 599 [28^th]) / No. 24 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Lakers commit a turnover on one in eight possessions, third best in the circuit.

No. 28 Minnesota Timberwolves (110.5)

[9-week ESPN rating: 30

6-week Abacus rating: 27

3-week Abacus rating: 26]

5-24, .172; 5^th in Northwest Division / 15^th seed / 28^th overall

KK:  -9; (2 Road Wins – 11 Home Losses) / No. 27 overall (tied)

CQ:  -25; (.496 [15^th] - .521 [29^th]) / No. 28 overall

SPOR-t:  -44; (562 [14^th] – 606 [30^th]) / No. 27 overall

Abacus Revelation: The T’wolves are the only Western Conference team averaging less than a point per possession.

No. 29 New York Knicks (114)

[9-week ESPN rating: 29

6-week Abacus rating: 28

3-week Abacus rating: 25]

5-28, .152; 4^th in Atlantic Division / 14^th seed / 29^th overall

KK:  -11; (2 Road Wins – 13 Home Losses) / No. 30 overall

CQ:  -36; (.480 [26^th] - .516 [26^th]) / No. 29 overall

SPOR-t:  -42; (558 [16^th] – 600 [29^th]) / No. 26 overall

Abacus Revelation: The Knicks rank dead last in defending the 3-point shot and allowing offensive rebounds.

No. 30 Philadelphia 76ers (119)

[9-week ESPN rating: 28

6-week Abacus rating: 30

3-week Abacus rating: 30]

4-25, .138; 5^th in Atlantic Division / 15^th seed / 30^th overall

KK:  -10; (4 Road Wins – 14 Home Losses) / No. 29 overall

CQ:  -38; (.450 [30^th] - .488 [11^th]) / No. 30 overall

SPOR-t:  -82; (467 [30^th] – 549 [8^th]) / No. 30 overall

Abacus Revelation: While dreadful offensively, the Sixers are top ten in defensive efficiency, No. 1 in forcing turnovers.

Power Ratings --The Measurement Instrument

Our team-ranking tool utilizes four elements. Two scales are based solely on team wins and losses; the others are measures of the efficiency of team performance in comparison with the competition. First, we’ll simply use win-loss record irrespective of conference.

The second criterion will be the difference between a team’s road wins and its home losses. Since this cute little metric is said to be a personal favorite of veteran NBA coach George Karl, let’s call this the Karl Kount (KK).

Criterion No. 3, Conversion Quotient (CQ), involves the rate at which a team converts its possessions into a successful field goals or free throw attempts. Like the KK, the computation is simple subtraction—a team’s rate of offensive efficiency minus that of the opponent.

Lastly, please allow Abacus to introduce the “SPOR-t” score. 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.