GustavBahler wrote:Rookie wrote:EwingPSD wrote:nycericanguy wrote:franco12 wrote:How is this fair? We were playing at a 50 win pace after we added Josh H? As much as I loved Toppin, did he actually help us win games? And we added DiVincenzo who could impact the team in the same way as Josh.
i think its fair, we need one of our big young 3 (grimes, RJ, IQ) to reach their CEILING if we are going to be true contenders with this roster. as it stands we cant expect to play as well as we did with Hart all year. I think within 2 wins of the ECF is indeed more or less our ceiling... unless like i said someone steps up big time. Which I do think is possible.
and thats fine with me, to go from where we were a few years ago to now having a young, borderline contending roster with a true superstar and being 1 piece (either internal or external) from being a legit contender is all you can ask for.
I agree with this. I didn't see a wins prediction and didn't see the whole article. I saw we were 10th but I don't know who was in front or behind. The team was pretty healthy last year and Josh Hart played out of his mind after the trade deadline. I agree unless we get a big jump from one of the players you mentioned or Randle returns to being a high 30s or 40% shooter from 3 I think its fair
that site is paywalled. Can someone post the teams that are ahead of us? Philly could be a mess if Harden does the same routine he did in Houston when he wanted to get traded and they have a new coach. Miami had depth issues and lost 2 rotation players. Milwaukee has a new coach. Boston lost Smart and added a player who runs out of gas come playoff time if he's not injured. Toronto didn't get better, same with Chicago. Atlanta and Brooklyn still don't scare me. Maybe Charlotte and Orlando surprise. Detroit and Washington still suck
Nuggets
Bucks
Warriors
Celtics
Suns
Lakers
Heat
Kings
Cavs
Grizzlies
Clippers
Sixers
Knicks
Really? the Cavs ahead of us after we eliminated them in the play offs.
Warriors are poised for a flame out.
Lakers too.
Grizzlies with their six shooter?
We have question marks. But so do many of those teams ranked ahead of us.
If we're in the play in range, something bad happened (injury, major under achievement, etc.)
Nothing is guaranteed and I am not going to bet money on the Knicks because I do think we're short. But we're right there with many of those teams.
JesseDark wrote:Sounds like a fair assessment to me. Does it really matter if we win 50 or more games if we can’t advance beyond the 2nd round?
We are a middle of the pack team. The Divincenzo move is being insanely overrated by the fanbase. He’s a nice bench player.
Philc1 wrote:JesseDark wrote:Sounds like a fair assessment to me. Does it really matter if we win 50 or more games if we can’t advance beyond the 2nd round?
We are a middle of the pack team. The Divincenzo move is being insanely overrated by the fanbase. He’s a nice bench player.
Insanely overrated by whom ?
franco12 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Rookie wrote:EwingPSD wrote:nycericanguy wrote:franco12 wrote:How is this fair? We were playing at a 50 win pace after we added Josh H? As much as I loved Toppin, did he actually help us win games? And we added DiVincenzo who could impact the team in the same way as Josh.
i think its fair, we need one of our big young 3 (grimes, RJ, IQ) to reach their CEILING if we are going to be true contenders with this roster. as it stands we cant expect to play as well as we did with Hart all year. I think within 2 wins of the ECF is indeed more or less our ceiling... unless like i said someone steps up big time. Which I do think is possible.
and thats fine with me, to go from where we were a few years ago to now having a young, borderline contending roster with a true superstar and being 1 piece (either internal or external) from being a legit contender is all you can ask for.
I agree with this. I didn't see a wins prediction and didn't see the whole article. I saw we were 10th but I don't know who was in front or behind. The team was pretty healthy last year and Josh Hart played out of his mind after the trade deadline. I agree unless we get a big jump from one of the players you mentioned or Randle returns to being a high 30s or 40% shooter from 3 I think its fair
that site is paywalled. Can someone post the teams that are ahead of us? Philly could be a mess if Harden does the same routine he did in Houston when he wanted to get traded and they have a new coach. Miami had depth issues and lost 2 rotation players. Milwaukee has a new coach. Boston lost Smart and added a player who runs out of gas come playoff time if he's not injured. Toronto didn't get better, same with Chicago. Atlanta and Brooklyn still don't scare me. Maybe Charlotte and Orlando surprise. Detroit and Washington still suck
Nuggets
Bucks
Warriors
Celtics
Suns
Lakers
Heat
Kings
Cavs
Grizzlies
Clippers
Sixers
Knicks
Really? the Cavs ahead of us after we eliminated them in the play offs.
Warriors are poised for a flame out.
Lakers too.
Grizzlies with their six shooter?
We have question marks. But so do many of those teams ranked ahead of us.
If we're in the play in range, something bad happened (injury, major under achievement, etc.)
Nothing is guaranteed and I am not going to bet money on the Knicks because I do think we're short. But we're right there with many of those teams.
9. Cleveland Cavaliers (6)Key additions (including re-signs):
Max Strus (Miami)
Caris LeVert (re-signed)
Georges Niang (Philadelphia)
Ty Jerome (Cleveland)
Damian Jones (Utah)
Emoni Bates (49th pick)
Key subtractions:
Cedi Osman (San Antonio)
Lamar Stevens (San Antonio)
Robin Lopez (Milwaukee)
Pressing question: Have we hit a wall with Donovan Mitchell teams?
I like the Cavs’ offseason. Strus can be the 3-and-D wing they were desperately missing, and Niang gives them a good shooter off the bench. They still have a great core with a ton of talent. But we keep seeing a pattern with Mitchell’s teams when they get to the playoffs. They just come up short in ways where he could have been better, and things look so disjointed as they lose. Mitchell has to make better decisions in clutch moments in the postseason, and maybe Darius Garland needs the ball more.
This worry also could become moot with the ascension of Evan Mobley. They need him to dominate a team like New York in the playoffs to show they’ve evolved. But with the volume of offense Mitchell is responsible for, he has to be a better leader on the court with his decision-making to see progress. Rudy Gobert is no longer around to blame
Looks like the changes to the roster, predicted regular season success, played more of a role in the ranking than recent playoffs.
Interesting comment about Mitchell's lack of clutch in the playoffs. Looks like Ainge saw the same thing.
CLE won 51 games and improved their roster. not crazy to rank them above us, we are a bad matchup for them but they are a very good team and their roster has more talent than us.
The NBA desperately wants you to believe Donovan Mitchell is better than Brunson despite abundant evidence to the contrary.
I hate these kind of write ups
They focus on player movement who was added and subtracted as the key thing. You could just as easily make the case that continuity is a bigger thing especially when things were working and trending well
For example it’s a bigger issue whether RJ shot continues to improve like playoffs and get more reliable or whether Grimes decides to shoot more than it is adding another non star
Chandler wrote:I hate these kind of write upsThey focus on player movement who was added and subtracted as the key thing. You could just as easily make the case that continuity is a bigger thing especially when things were working and trending well
For example it’s a bigger issue whether RJ shot continues to improve like playoffs and get more reliable or whether Grimes decides to shoot more than it is adding another non star
I’m in this bucket with continuity.
Miami loses 2 important rotation player and are considered contenders on that list? Not for me.
I don't really know the criteria used but I think Vegas odds are historically a good indicator as there are real stakes involved. At least until 20 games into the season or so when Basketball references matchup predictions become more useful. That being said trades can have huge effects on records, positive (Josh Hart) or negative (Kyrie Irving).
I personally have big issues with Milwaukee because I can't think of any champions that have fired their coach, replaced with a neophyte, and then improved. Conversely, I think Philadelphia will improve because I don't like Doc but think Nick Nurse is a smart guy.
gradyandrew wrote:I don't really know the criteria used but I think Vegas odds are historically a good indicator as there are real stakes involved. At least until 20 games into the season or so when Basketball references matchup predictions become more useful. That being said trades can have huge effects on records, positive (Josh Hart) or negative (Kyrie Irving). I personally have big issues with Milwaukee because I can't think of any champions that have fired their coach, replaced with a neophyte, and then improved. Conversely, I think Philadelphia will improve because I don't like Doc but think Nick Nurse is a smart guy.
Does Vegas keep stats on their predictions over the years, and how well their predictions have been thru the years ?
Alpha1971 wrote:gradyandrew wrote:I don't really know the criteria used but I think Vegas odds are historically a good indicator as there are real stakes involved. At least until 20 games into the season or so when Basketball references matchup predictions become more useful. That being said trades can have huge effects on records, positive (Josh Hart) or negative (Kyrie Irving). I personally have big issues with Milwaukee because I can't think of any champions that have fired their coach, replaced with a neophyte, and then improved. Conversely, I think Philadelphia will improve because I don't like Doc but think Nick Nurse is a smart guy.
Does Vegas keep stats on their predictions over the years, and how well their predictions have been thru the years ?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/lea...
basketball reference keeps track of preseason odds and conveniently lists them next to actual records. Perhaps someone with?more time and talent can do a regression analysis- maybe I will ask son as a "homework question"?for him taking ap stats next year.
My inexpert eye sees 11 of 12 top preseason teams making the playoffs (Dallas) and 10 of 12 bottom teams missing (Kings and Knicks). Pistons (-12.5) we're the biggest under performers while Jazz and Kings (+13.5) we're the biggest over performers.
I couldn't find the article but I believe it was Kevin Pelton on ESPN (but it also could have been 538.com) that said up through the first 20 games vegas predictions are most accurate while at that point and increasingly towards the end adjusted margin of victory is most important.
