Dolphin Ratings - Women's National Basketball Association

Explanation: Each team is listed with its record, overall score differential, and its ratings. Brief explanations of the ratings follow.

Schedule The number in this column is the effective opponent strength of a team. In other words, they would be expected to have the same record had they played all games against an opponent of this predictive rating at a neutral site. Because this calculation depends on the strength of the team in question, it is not possible to rank schedules using these values.
Expected Losses For college teams, this number is the number of losses an average ranked (top 15 hockey; otherwise top 25) team would be expected to have against the team's schedule. For pro teams, this is the number of losses an average team would be expected to have against the team's schedule. Unlike the schedule ranking, this value can be used to rank schedules.
Standard Ranks teams in an order such that a team is "probably better" than all teams ranked lower than it. This calculation uses margin of victory only for computing a team's opponents strengths; the team's rating itself is computed using only wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule
Median Likelihood Determines the likely ratings for each team, based on its wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule. This generally produces the same or similar ratings as the standard ranking.
Predictive Both schedule strength and rating vs. schedule strength are determined considering both the wins and losses and the score differentials. This rating contains none of the biases in the standard rating, but does weight recent games slightly more than past games since those are a better indication of the team's current strength. This rating is the best of the first three for seeing how good teams are, and thus is the best for predicting future results.
Improved RPI Rating The improved RPI formula is similar to the standard RPI, except that the schedule strength is carried out to infinite depth instead of ending with opponents' opponents, thus allows for a better comparison of isolated groups of teams than is given by the standard RPI calculation. It is similar to the simple rating, except that all games are given equal weight.
Scoring. This value indicates how many points a team would be expected to score if it played an identical team.
Offense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team scores. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to score the league average number of points. This does not necessarily rate a team's offensive abilities, as a fast pace in basketball or big-play defense in football can make a team score more points.
Defense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team allows. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to allow the league average number of points. The same caveat in the predictive-offense rating applies here.

In order to increase early-season stability, the three main rankings, the improved RPI, and the college pseudopoll include priors based on the previous season final predictive ratings and occasionally incorporating preseason predictions of various major publications. The other rankings for college sports do not include priors, and thus can be wildly unstable early in the year. A team whose rankings are affected by this prior is noted with a P following its rankings.

Full Ranking

                                            STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI    SCORING     OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
SEATTLE     35  6 3367 3051 -0.065 17.525    1  0.772    1  0.799    1  0.434    1 0.5712   11  3.504    5 -0.007    1  0.875
NEW YORK    24 15 3090 2991  0.150 20.549    2  0.372    2  0.376    3  0.341    2 0.5340    8  3.561    4  0.136    4  0.546
WASHINGTON  22 14 2782 2687  0.133 18.680    3  0.345    3  0.341    5  0.255    3 0.5319   12  3.503    7 -0.190    3  0.700
INDIANA     22 15 2883 2747  0.142 19.204    4  0.309    4  0.296    4  0.306    4 0.5292   10  3.507    6 -0.121    2  0.732
ATLANTA     23 18 3530 3414  0.179 21.979    5  0.284    5  0.276    2  0.361    5 0.5265    2  3.760    2  1.034   10 -0.311
CONNECTICUT 17 17 2754 2715  0.122 17.711    6  0.095    6  0.087    6  0.153    6 0.5065    4  3.617    3  0.185    6  0.121
CHICAGO     14 20 2586 2611  0.123 18.004    7 -0.071    7 -0.088    8 -0.032    7 0.4865    9  3.514    9 -0.433    5  0.369
PHOENIX     17 21 3552 3527 -0.078 17.252    8 -0.175    8 -0.201    7 -0.031    8 0.4829    1  3.906    1  1.340   12 -1.402
SAN ANTONIO 14 22 2777 2920 -0.151 16.322    9 -0.361    9 -0.351   11 -0.384   10 0.4631    7  3.566   12 -0.568    9 -0.199
LOS ANGELES 13 23 2780 2921 -0.071 17.275   10 -0.363   10 -0.358   10 -0.320    9 0.4656    5  3.580   10 -0.444    8 -0.197
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
MINNESOTA   13 21 2675 2791 -0.156 15.215   11 -0.378   11 -0.364    9 -0.258   11 0.4620    6  3.575    8 -0.405    7 -0.111
TULSA        6 28 2652 3053 -0.141 16.173   12 -0.830   12 -0.818   12 -0.877   12 0.4172    3  3.701   11 -0.473   11 -1.282

WESTERN CONFERENCE
                                            STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI    SCORING     OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
SEATTLE     35  6 3367 3051 -0.065 17.525    1  0.772    1  0.799    1  0.434    1 0.5712   11  3.504    5 -0.007    1  0.875
PHOENIX     17 21 3552 3527 -0.078 17.252    8 -0.175    8 -0.201    7 -0.031    8 0.4829    1  3.906    1  1.340   12 -1.402
SAN ANTONIO 14 22 2777 2920 -0.151 16.322    9 -0.361    9 -0.351   11 -0.384   10 0.4631    7  3.566   12 -0.568    9 -0.199
LOS ANGELES 13 23 2780 2921 -0.071 17.275   10 -0.363   10 -0.358   10 -0.320    9 0.4656    5  3.580   10 -0.444    8 -0.197
MINNESOTA   13 21 2675 2791 -0.156 15.215   11 -0.378   11 -0.364    9 -0.258   11 0.4620    6  3.575    8 -0.405    7 -0.111
TULSA        6 28 2652 3053 -0.141 16.173   12 -0.830   12 -0.818   12 -0.877   12 0.4172    3  3.701   11 -0.473   11 -1.282

EASTERN CONFERENCE
                                            STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI    SCORING     OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
NEW YORK    24 15 3090 2991  0.150 20.549    2  0.372    2  0.376    3  0.341    2 0.5340    8  3.561    4  0.136    4  0.546
WASHINGTON  22 14 2782 2687  0.133 18.680    3  0.345    3  0.341    5  0.255    3 0.5319   12  3.503    7 -0.190    3  0.700
INDIANA     22 15 2883 2747  0.142 19.204    4  0.309    4  0.296    4  0.306    4 0.5292   10  3.507    6 -0.121    2  0.732
ATLANTA     23 18 3530 3414  0.179 21.979    5  0.284    5  0.276    2  0.361    5 0.5265    2  3.760    2  1.034   10 -0.311
CONNECTICUT 17 17 2754 2715  0.122 17.711    6  0.095    6  0.087    6  0.153    6 0.5065    4  3.617    3  0.185    6  0.121
CHICAGO     14 20 2586 2611  0.123 18.004    7 -0.071    7 -0.088    8 -0.032    7 0.4865    9  3.514    9 -0.433    5  0.369

DIVISION             W   L   PCT  RNK RATING
EASTERN CONFERENCE 122  99 0.552    1  0.298
WESTERN CONFERENCE  98 121 0.447    2 -0.319

Home field advantage amounts to:
     0.276 points in main ratings (0.226 for semineutral)
     0.025 points in improved RPI (0.023 for semineutral)
Average of 2.15 points per score

Predict score:








Team Strength vs. Time Plot:






posted: Sat Dec 28 14:04:01 2024
games through: Thu Sep 16 2010

Back to Dolphin rankings main page.