Home -
NBA - Boston Celtics, Orlando Magic among PPP leaders
Boston Celtics, Orlando Magic among PPP leaders
Friday, December 11, 2009 09:28 AM ET
Points per Possession (PPP) has been used to examine college hoops for years by Ken Pomeroy. However, not as much has been written in regards to using PPP in the NBA.
A couple of weeks ago, we did a College Football piece that showed there was almost a direct relationship between efficiency rating (Yards per Point) and success against the spread.

Well, for this week we decided to apply that same logic for the NBA, using Points per Possession (PPP) as the barometer, and even we were shocked at how predictive a number PPP has been in the early going.
Many handicappers have used PPP to handicap College Basketball games for many years, the most notable of which is Ken Pomeroy, but their has not been much written on the subject on the professional side. So, we decided to take a look at PPP for all 30 NBA teams and we what the relationship was to ATS performance.
We first took offensive PPP (OPPP), where the higher the figure the better, and then calculated defensive PPP (DPPP), where the lower the figure the better. Finally, we ultimately ranked every NBA team by net PPP (NPPP), and the difference between the performance of the top 20 teams and the bottom 10 teams is so obvious, it is downright scary.
As of that is not enough, we are using just raw PPP figures without adjusting for Strength of Schedule and other factors, and yet the results are still staggering. When we were through, we asked ourselves if handicapping hoops can really be this simple!
Before presenting those incredible results, let us just say that the top five OPPP teams have been Phoenix (1.15), Toronto (1.15), Atlanta (1.13), Denver (1.13) and Orlando (1.10), and the worst OPPP team has been the winless New Jersey Nets (0.93).
On the defensive side of the ball, the top five DPPP teams have been Boston (0.98), Milwaukee (0.99), Portland (0.99), Charlotte (1.01) and Dallas (1.01), while the worst defensive team based on DPPP has been Toronto (1.17).
And now, the moment you have all been waiting for. The following two tables include every team in the NBA ranked by NPPP, with the first table ranking the top 20 and the second table ranking the bottom 10. Take note of the difference in cumulative ATS records, which are also included.
Net Points per Possession (through November 24, 2009)
| Rank |
Team |
OPPP |
DPPP |
NPPP |
W |
L |
Pct |
| 1 |
Boston |
1.08 |
0.98 |
0.10 |
5 |
9 |
35.7% |
| 2 |
Portland |
1.07 |
0.99 |
0.08 |
10 |
6 |
62.5% |
| 3 |
Dallas |
1.08 |
1.01 |
0.07 |
9 |
4 |
69.2% |
| 4 |
Orlando |
1.10 |
1.03 |
0.07 |
9 |
5 |
64.3% |
| 5 |
Atlanta |
1.13 |
1.06 |
0.07 |
11 |
3 |
78.6% |
| 6 |
Denver |
1.13 |
1.06 |
0.07 |
7 |
6 |
53.8% |
| 7 |
LA Lakers |
1.07 |
1.01 |
0.06 |
6 |
7 |
46.2% |
| 8 |
Milwaukee |
1.04 |
0.99 |
0.05 |
8 |
4 |
66.7% |
| 9 |
Phoenix |
1.15 |
1.10 |
0.05 |
8 |
6 |
57.1% |
| 10 |
Cleveland |
1.08 |
1.04 |
0.04 |
6 |
8 |
42.9% |
| 11 |
Houston |
1.09 |
1.06 |
0.03 |
9 |
5 |
64.3% |
| 12 |
San Antonio |
1.10 |
1.07 |
0.03 |
6 |
6 |
50.0% |
| 13 |
Miami |
1.07 |
1.05 |
0.02 |
6 |
7 |
46.2% |
| 14 |
Oklahoma City |
1.03 |
1.01 |
0.02 |
8 |
6 |
57.1% |
| 15 |
Utah |
1.09 |
1.08 |
0.01 |
6 |
7 |
46.2% |
| 16 |
Indiana |
1.02 |
1.03 |
-0.01 |
5 |
6 |
45.5% |
| 17 |
Sacramento |
1.08 |
1.10 |
-0.02 |
8 |
5 |
61.5% |
| 18 |
Toronto |
1.15 |
1.17 |
-0.02 |
7 |
7 |
50.0% |
| 19 |
Detroit |
1.05 |
1.08 |
-0.03 |
8 |
6 |
57.1% |
| 20 |
Golden State |
1.08 |
1.11 |
-0.03 |
7 |
5 |
58.3% |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
149 |
118 |
55.6% |
Net Points per Possession (through November 24, 2009)
| Rank |
Team |
OPPP |
DPPP |
NPPP |
W |
L |
Pct |
| 21 |
Chicago |
0.98 |
1.02 |
-0.04 |
4 |
9 |
30.8% |
| 22 |
LA Clippers |
1.04 |
1.08 |
-0.04 |
5 |
10 |
33.3% |
| 23 |
Charlotte |
0.96 |
1.01 |
-0.05 |
8 |
5 |
61.5% |
| 24 |
New Orleans |
1.07 |
1.12 |
-0.05 |
7 |
8 |
46.7% |
| 25 |
New York |
1.02 |
1.08 |
-0.06 |
5 |
8 |
38.5% |
| 26 |
Philadelphia |
1.04 |
1.10 |
-0.06 |
4 |
9 |
30.8% |
| 27 |
Washington |
1.03 |
1.09 |
-0.06 |
3 |
9 |
25.0% |
| 28 |
Memphis |
1.05 |
1.12 |
-0.07 |
7 |
7 |
50.0% |
| 29 |
New Jersey |
0.93 |
1.04 |
-0.11 |
4 |
9 |
30.8% |
| 30 |
Minnesota |
0.94 |
1.10 |
-0.16 |
5 |
9 |
35.7% |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
52 |
83 |
38.5% |
The top 20 conveniently cuts off at a NPPP of -0.03, and note that teams that are rated -0.03 or better are a cumulative 149-118, 55.8 percent against the spread. Then, almost as if it is scripted, take note of the immediate drop-off for teams rated -0.04 or worse, which are a cumulative 52-83, 38.5 percent.
It is early, but this certainly seems worthy of keeping on top of, and we would pay special attention whenever a top 20 NPPP tames faces a bottom 10 NPPP team and the points spread us reasonable, say single-digits.