Minnesota enters the postseason first in my power ratings, Elo ratings, and combined adjusted scoring. Golden State has the strongest individual unit with its defense. But the first-round matchup that gives me the most trouble is Las Vegas against Indiana: power ratings favor the Aces, while Elo and adjusted scoring give the Fever small edges.
This preview uses my September 27 reports entering the postseason, with the Elo dataset exception noted below. Playoff results are excluded from the comparisons and series leans below.
The Bracket and the Numbers
The official WNBA bracket pairs Minnesota with New York, Golden State with Dallas, Las Vegas with Indiana, and Atlanta with Washington. The first round begins September 27 and uses a best-of-three, 1-1-1 format: the higher seed hosts Game 1 and, if needed, Game 3. Each lower seed gets Game 2 at home.
Playoff seeds and power rankings are different. Washington is the fifth seed but seventh in my power ratings; Indiana is seeded sixth but ranks fifth; Dallas is seeded seventh but ranks sixth.
| Playoff Seed | Team | Record | Power Rank | Power Rating | Elo Rank | Elo Rating | Adj. Offense | Adj. Defense | Adj. Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Minnesota Lynx | 33–11 | 1 | 103.155 | 1 | 1663.737 | 3.956 | 3.152 | 7.108 |
| 2 | Golden State Valkyries | 32–12 | 2 | 102.884 | 2 | 1655.163 | -5.857 | 12.631 | 6.773 |
| 3 | Las Vegas Aces | 31–13 | 3 | 102.394 | 5 | 1616.124 | 4.326 | 0.895 | 5.221 |
| 4 | Atlanta Dream | 30–14 | 4 | 102.241 | 3 | 1645.885 | 3.956 | 2.514 | 6.470 |
| 5 | Washington Mystics | 28–16 | 7 | 101.392 | 8 | 1544.015 | -3.623 | 4.420 | 0.797 |
| 6 | Indiana Fever | 28–16 | 5 | 101.763 | 4 | 1617.587 | 9.416 | -3.917 | 5.499 |
| 7 | Dallas Wings | 27–17 | 6 | 101.407 | 7 | 1550.936 | 2.294 | 1.660 | 3.954 |
| 8 | New York Liberty | 26–18 | 8 | 101.112 | 6 | 1573.627 | 2.363 | 0.687 | 3.050 |
Sources: my power ratings, Elo ratings, and combined adjusted scoring report. Values are preserved as published; rounding can make the displayed offense and defense differ slightly from the reported total when added.
The records above are regular-season records. The published Elo report also includes the Commissioner’s Cup final, which New York won 93–85 over Las Vegas. Its records are therefore 27–18 for New York and 31–14 for Las Vegas. I use those published Elo ratings without recalculating them; that dataset difference matters when comparing Elo with the other measures.
Adjusted offense measures scoring relative to what opponents typically allow. Adjusted defense measures how far a team holds opponents below their usual scoring average, so higher is better on both sides. The combined total brings those two measures together. These are scoring-based measures, not per-100-possession efficiency ratings.
Higher Elo ratings indicate stronger teams on a separate scale from the power ratings. Power and Elo gaps are not predicted point spreads, and their numerical sizes should not be compared across scales. These reports do not directly adjust for current injuries or home court; the series leans are my interpretation of the profiles entering the playoffs.
No. 1 Minnesota Lynx vs. No. 8 New York Liberty
Minnesota leads 103.155 to 101.112 in power rating, a 2.043 advantage, the largest of the four first-round gaps. Adjusted scoring agrees: the Lynx lead 7.108 to 3.050, a difference of 4.058.
Elo also favors Minnesota, 1663.737 to 1573.627, a 90.110 advantage. The Lynx rank first in Elo; New York ranks sixth, two places higher than its power ranking. All three measures favor Minnesota, though Elo puts the Liberty ahead of Dallas and Washington.
The case for Minnesota is balance. Its adjusted offense is 3.956 compared with New York’s 2.363, while its defense is 3.152 compared with the Liberty’s 0.687. Minnesota has the better season-long figure on both ends. New York is positive in both categories, but neither unit matches the Lynx’s production.
There is a reason to resist calling this an easy series: New York won the regular-season matchup 2–1, according to the WNBA’s series preview. That preview also flagged Olivia Miles’s calf injury entering Game 1. Minnesota’s full-season rating cannot resolve that availability question.
For New York, the task is to outperform its defensive baseline. If the Liberty can keep Minnesota’s offense from establishing its usual advantage, their own positive offensive rating gives them a route to competitive games. If both teams reproduce their season-long profiles, Minnesota has more ways to win.
My lean: Minnesota. The Lynx have the clearest power-rating advantage, supported by Elo and better adjusted scoring on both ends.
No. 2 Golden State Valkyries vs. No. 7 Dallas Wings
Golden State leads 102.884 to 101.407 in power rating, a 1.477 gap. Its combined adjusted scoring advantage is 6.773 to 3.954, a difference of 2.819.
Elo reinforces that choice: Golden State leads 1655.163 to 1550.936, a 104.227 advantage, the largest Elo gap of these four series. The Valkyries rank second in Elo and the Wings seventh. All three measures point toward Golden State.
Those totals hide a dramatic contrast. Dallas has a 2.294 adjusted offense and a 1.660 adjusted defense, a positive contribution from each unit. Golden State’s offense sits at -5.857, 14th in the league, but its defense is an extraordinary 12.631. The Valkyries hold opponents about 12.6 points below their usual scoring average, giving them an 8.211 advantage over even the second-ranked defense.
Dallas has the stronger offensive rating by 8.151, but Golden State’s defensive advantage is 10.971. Those comparisons explain why the Valkyries finish ahead overall despite the offensive weakness. Golden State also swept the three regular-season meetings, per the WNBA’s matchup review.
The Wings’ opportunity is on defense. Golden State’s scoring profile gives Dallas a chance to stay close even when its own offense struggles. But the Wings need to preserve enough of their usual scoring production against a defense that has been far better than anyone else’s.
My lean: Golden State. Dallas has the more balanced profile, but the Valkyries’ defensive advantage is large enough to lead in combined adjusted scoring as well as power rating, with Elo also favoring Golden State.
No. 3 Las Vegas Aces vs. No. 6 Indiana Fever
This is the closest series in my power ratings. Las Vegas leads 102.394 to 101.763, just 0.631. Adjusted scoring reverses the order: Indiana leads 5.499 to 5.221, a narrow 0.278 edge.
Elo sides with Indiana too, but barely: 1617.587 to 1616.124, a difference of just 1.463. The Fever rank fourth and the Aces fifth. That is effectively an even matchup on this scale, and the Cup-final inclusion in the Elo report makes the tiny difference particularly worth keeping in perspective.
Indiana’s offense is the reason. Its 9.416 adjusted offensive rating leads the league, 5.090 ahead of second-place Las Vegas at 4.326. The Fever score roughly 9.4 points more per game than their opponents typically allow. That is a substantial advantage even against another excellent offense.
The defensive comparison nearly cancels it out. Las Vegas rates 0.895 on defense, while Indiana is at -3.917, 12th in the league. The Aces’ defensive advantage is 4.812. Indiana’s scoring strength makes an upset plausible, but its defense gives Las Vegas a clear way to answer.
The Fever won the regular-season series 2–1. The league’s preview also noted that Aliyah Boston and Ty Harris left Indiana’s regular-season finale with injuries. The offensive numbers describe what Indiana accomplished over the season; they do not establish the health of its playoff lineup.
My lean: Las Vegas, narrowly. The power-rating edge and home-court advantage tip my choice toward the Aces, but Indiana is my strongest upset candidate. The narrow Indiana edges in Elo and adjusted scoring give no basis for treating this as a comfortable favorite against a distant challenger.
No. 4 Atlanta Dream vs. No. 5 Washington Mystics
Atlanta leads 102.241 to 101.392 in power rating, a 0.849 advantage. The adjusted scoring gap is much larger: 6.470 to 0.797, a difference of 5.673, the widest in this round.
Atlanta also leads in Elo, 1645.885 to 1544.015, a 101.870 advantage. The Dream rank third and the Mystics eighth, matching their positions in combined adjusted scoring. Both measures suggest more separation than the fourth and fifth playoff seeds imply.
Washington’s defense deserves respect. Its 4.420 rating ranks second in the league and exceeds Atlanta’s 2.514 by 1.906. The problem is the other end: Washington’s adjusted offense is -3.623, while Atlanta’s is 3.956. The Dream’s 7.579 offensive advantage more than offsets the Mystics’ defensive edge.
Atlanta ranks third in combined adjusted scoring, ahead of both Indiana and Las Vegas. Washington ranks eighth among the eight playoff teams. That makes this a more favorable statistical matchup for Atlanta than the adjacent seeds suggest.
Still, Washington won the regular-season series 2–1, as documented in the WNBA preview. The Mystics have already shown they can win this matchup. Their route is to make defense decisive and get enough scoring to avoid asking that defense to compensate for too much.
My lean: Atlanta. Washington has the better defense, but Atlanta’s strength on both ends gives it the more convincing overall profile.
What I Will Be Watching
Minnesota and Atlanta offer the strongest combinations of offense and defense. Golden State tests how far an exceptional defense can carry a weak scoring profile. Indiana poses the opposite question: can the league’s best adjusted offense overcome a defense near the bottom?
My first-round choices are Minnesota, Golden State, Las Vegas, and Atlanta, with Las Vegas–Indiana the toughest call. That series is where power ratings favor Las Vegas while Elo and adjusted scoring narrowly favor Indiana, and where the seeds do the least to capture how close the teams look.
The full regular-season tables are available in my WNBA season reports.