Pace Rating discrepencies

Home for all your discussion of basketball statistical analysis.
Post Reply
Reader
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:38 pm

Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by Reader »

Why do NBA Stuffer and Basketball Reference have one pace rating for a team, while Hollinger and NBA.com have another pace rating for the same team and Team Rankings has yet another pace rating for the same team?

E.G. Philadelphia 76ers Pace Rating:

NBA Stuffer & Basketball Reference: 99.8
NBA.com & Hollinger: 102.4
Team Rankings: 105.1

Can anyone clue me into why there is such a discrepancy? Anyone know which is most accurate?

Thanks.
jbrocato23
Posts: 105
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 8:49 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by jbrocato23 »

Can't say for sure without checking, but I'm guessing it's a possessions per 48 vs. possessions per game thing. I have no idea why there are three different ones though, perhaps some sites are more up to date than others.
xkonk
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:37 am

Re: Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by xkonk »

Team Ranking says per game while bball-ref is per 48, so that could be part of it. Bball-ref is the only one where I could (with a brief search) find any kind of methodology (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html). I'm guessing it's differences in how you count/weigh free throws and rebounds.
Mike G
Posts: 6144
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:02 am
Location: Asheville, NC

Re: Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by Mike G »

The Sixers are averaging 48.88 minutes per game. This shows about twice the normal number of overtime minutes.
Still, that's just 1.018 X 48, or 1.8% more than 48.
The discrepancies shown are 2.6% more than b-r.com, and one is just about twice that.
NBA Stuffer & Basketball Reference: 99.8
NBA.com & Hollinger: 102.4
Team Rankings: 105.1
v-zero
Posts: 520
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:30 pm

Re: Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by v-zero »

The value on BBRef uses a rather extended formula, whereas most people use something close to: pos = FGA + TOV -ORB + 0.44*FTA. Using this formula the pace value that Hollinger and NBA.com is correct as a per-48 value. I assume the BBRef one is correct according to their formula, and the Team Rankings one is probably per-game and uses a slightly larger FTA coeff - I would guess they use 0.5...

The BBR calculation can be found here: http://www.basketball-reference.com/abo ... .html#poss
Mike G
Posts: 6144
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:02 am
Location: Asheville, NC

Re: Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by Mike G »

I am surprised it isn't just the actual number of possessions, as gathered from bpb.
Then again, some might define fractional possessions at the end of quarters.
Reader
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:38 pm

Re: Pace Rating discrepencies

Post by Reader »

jbrocato23 wrote: … I'm guessing it's a possessions per 48 vs. possessions per game thing
This is what I was thinking too.
xkonk wrote:Team Ranking says per game while bball-ref is per 48, so that could be part of it. Bball-ref is the only one where I could (with a brief search) find any kind of methodology (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html). I'm guessing it's differences in how you count/weigh free throws and rebounds.
Thank you for the link and I should have known that TR was per game; I just didn’t think playing in some OT games would skew the # of possessions so much.
Mike G wrote:The Sixers are averaging 48.88 minutes per game. This shows about twice the normal number of overtime minutes.
Still, that's just 1.018 X 48, or 1.8% more than 48.
The discrepancies shown are 2.6% more than b-r.com, and one is just about twice that.
Yes, this was confusing me in terms of the per game vs. per-48 stats; thought the discrepancy was too large; which is why I was unsure if TR was using per game #’s or just weighting things differently.
v-zero wrote:… Using this formula the pace value that Hollinger and NBA.com is correct as a per-48 value.
Thanks V; I will move forward using the Hollinger and NBA #’s for my official numbers. Appreciate the link too.
Mike G wrote:I am surprised it isn't just the actual number of possessions, as gathered from bpb....
You and me both.
Post Reply