PDA

View Full Version : Look back: ESPN Preseason Playoff Predictions



tredigs
04-18-2013, 03:15 PM
Here are basketball prospectus/ESPN's playoff predictions before the year started:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8517499/miami-heat-denver-nuggets-top-magazine-team-predictions-espn-magazine

East:

1. Heat - 61-21
2. Hawks - 50-32
3. Knicks - 49-33
4. Celtics - 49-33
5. Sixers - 48-34
6. Bulls - 47-35
7. Nets - 44-37
8. Pacers - 44-37

9: Raptors
10: Bucks
11: Cavs
12: Pistons
13: Wiz
14: Magic
15: Cats

West:

1: Nuggets - 58-24
2: Thunder - 58-24
3: T Wolves - 58-24
4: Lakers - 57-25
5: Spurs - 56-26
6: Clippers - 52-30
7: Jazz - 47-35
8: Grizzlies - 46-36

9: Mavs
10: Hornets
11: Blazers
12: Kings
13: Warriors
14: Suns
15: Rockets

I think they did a pretty good job with the East, while the West is a mess. Rockets and Warriors jump out, interesting to see Nugs at 1 and Wolves at 3 (killed by injury, but still I don't remember seeing them projected that high).

Anyway, I always like going back and checking predictions after the fact, so here you have it. I think PSD did one also? If someone can find that it'd be interesting to see the comparison.

Baller1
04-18-2013, 03:24 PM
Wow the West is brutal. Houston last? Damn.

ugafan
04-18-2013, 03:26 PM
Man oh man, if only Lou Williams stayed healthy for the year.

NYKnickFanatic
04-18-2013, 03:27 PM
I was shocked to see the Hawks second...and then I saw Houston. Lol terrible.

ugafan
04-18-2013, 03:27 PM
Wow the West is brutal. Houston last? Damn.

This was before the Harden trade.

John Walls Era
04-18-2013, 03:29 PM
Who in their right mind would ever put the Wolves that high? 0 chance they jump from crap to top 4 out of nowhere.

NYKnickFanatic
04-18-2013, 03:30 PM
This was before the Harden trade.

True, forgot about that.

sixers247
04-18-2013, 03:31 PM
Def had to be before the Harden Trade

sep11ie
04-18-2013, 03:31 PM
They thought they had Roy from 4 years ago

Blitzbolt
04-18-2013, 03:34 PM
I was so mad at this they got us at the 8th.

PS look at how much OJ Mayo sucks now letting him go made us better.

tredigs
04-18-2013, 03:36 PM
This was before the Harden trade.

Ah yeah that makes sense for Houston. They still were not pegged as a playoff team by most though. I remember a lot of 10-11's.

Bravo95
04-18-2013, 03:45 PM
Hawks won 44, so six away from proving them right. That's without Lou/Zaza and basically tanking the last 2 games.

RLundi
04-18-2013, 03:46 PM
What the hell, T-Wolves??

Further proof that these "experts" don't really have any more knowledge than you or I do.

OceanSpray
04-18-2013, 03:47 PM
With a healthy K-Love, that record for T-Wolves wouldn't be far off.

OceanSpray
04-18-2013, 03:47 PM
What the hell, T-Wolves??

Further proof that these "experts" don't really have any more knowledge than you or I do.

That was assuming he was healthy.

OceanSpray
04-18-2013, 03:48 PM
What the hell, T-Wolves??

Further proof that these "experts" don't really have any more knowledge than you or I do.

That was assuming he was healthy.

Baller1
04-18-2013, 03:48 PM
This was before the Harden trade.

Ah okay, my bad. I didn't check the date of when this was done... Makes a lot more sense now then.

mngopher35
04-18-2013, 03:54 PM
To be fair they probably didn't expect us to have 127 games missed between our 4 best players (Rubio, Love, Pek, AK). Then add on Budinger missing 59 games and a couple reserves missing games here and there. Even healthy I'll admit that is a bit high, but 6-8 range wouldn't have been unreasonable at all.

RLundi
04-18-2013, 03:57 PM
With a healthy K-Love, that record for T-Wolves wouldn't be far off.

Even so, 58 wins is absurd. If they were completely healthy, I could see 45 wins. But to go from a 30-win team to nearly 60 wins? I don't think so.

BlinkManJan02
04-18-2013, 04:03 PM
Woooooo Bucks surprising the predictions. Nice to be back in the Playoffs.

Tony_Starks
04-18-2013, 04:15 PM
What in the world would make them think Indy would fall off so bad in the east? They had a good run last season and the conference is horrible.....

RiceOnTheRun
04-18-2013, 04:38 PM
What the hell, T-Wolves??

Further proof that these "experts" don't really have any more knowledge than you or I do.

Not really too outrageous. A healthy Love and Rubio is as deadly a duo as any in the NBA. Plus Pekovic and AK47 are pretty good but 3 is a bit ridiculous for them. I would think maybe 5-6.

Hawkeye15
04-18-2013, 04:39 PM
What the hell, T-Wolves??

Further proof that these "experts" don't really have any more knowledge than you or I do.

This was assuming each starter didn't miss over 1/5th of the season, including Love missing 64 games, and Rubio's 28 missed games plus recovery. Pekovic, Kirilenko, Roy, Lee all missed over 18 (Roy and Lee the season) and Budinger missed 59 games, with the Wolves setting the all time bench mark for 322 missed games due to injury. Though I thought #3 was a reach, I think they were easily a playoff team had they not been crushed by injuries.

ManRam
04-18-2013, 04:56 PM
injuries, the houston trade and the obviously unexpected make these predictions palatable. they're pretty solid overall...better than mine were.

tredigs
04-18-2013, 04:59 PM
Just looked at it again - it's amazing how far off they were on the Warriors given that they only got ~30 games from Bogut and lost our previous years 6th man + best perimeter defender the first week of the season. The discrepancy in the Wolves and Rockets makes sense given the injuries and the signing of Harden, but not that. Had 'em as a 29 win team.

Guppyfighter
04-18-2013, 05:21 PM
This is what happens when you don't use advanced statistics to make predictions.

KnickaBocka.44
04-18-2013, 05:50 PM
I like how they have the Knicks at 3 and winning the division here, but when they put out their individual divisional predictions not one person out of about 30 picked them.

tredigs
04-18-2013, 05:52 PM
This is what happens when you don't use advanced statistics to make predictions.

Hollinger - using advanced stats - had the W's at 40-42, finishing 10th, and POST Harden trade had the Rockets tied for the 11th spot at 37-45. He had the Knicks as a 7th seed, and likely missed wildly on a few more. Those are the ones I checked.

But in general, he does do the best job predicting. It's just still a mess.

SteBO
04-18-2013, 05:55 PM
Hawks as the 2 seed still cracks me up.....

DR_1
04-18-2013, 05:58 PM
What the hell, T-Wolves??

Further proof that these "experts" don't really have any more knowledge than you or I do.

Well said. I still can't believe Atlanta, Indiana, and Minnesota :laugh2:

slaker619
04-18-2013, 06:14 PM
If it wasn't for the injuries would've been hella right but they violated the rockets stuff hard !

Chronz
04-18-2013, 06:19 PM
BP wasn't alone in ranking T'Wolves that highly, apparently several egg heads were high on them. I had them in the lower tier but who knows, they could have been right.

ChiTownPacerFan
04-18-2013, 06:41 PM
I'm impressed my own predictions were so close.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?767991-With-rosters-pretty-much-set-rank-your-top-8-seedings-for-both-conferences&p=23882099#post23882099

The Lakers and Knicks make me look bad, but the rest were pretty damn close. If the Rondo and Bynum injuries hadn't happened, they'd look even better.

What's really funny is that my 2-7 prediction for the West is identical to the actual 1-6.

tredigs
04-18-2013, 07:27 PM
Haha thanks for that link Chi - I just found this gem of an argument in there:


Well I think Nets will be at worst 12th best defense in the NBA.
A healthy Brook Lopez who is a big body and can block shots is a lot better than a PF playing Center like Shelden Williams. Also Gerald Wallace is a lot better than Marshon Brooks at defense.


we will do a mini-bet, just you and me. If you are down.

Nets will not finish in the top 15 on defense, according to basketball-reference or Hollinger rankings. If you win, I will sport a Nets team logo, if I win, you sport a Wolves one for a month. If you don't understand the rankings, I will PM you an explanation of each.

Deal?


Ok, I wont lose so I guess I will have fun seeing you have the picture of the team you HATE the most.


haha, you are so juvenile. It's hilarious actually.

Alright, deal. Nets will finish outside the top 15 in defense according to basketball reference.com, and Hollinger's rankings. If they do, you sport a Wolves logo. If they don't, I sport a Nets.

Cheers.


You better remember the deal for me because June is a long time.

And according to basketball-ref, the Brooklyn Nets finiishhhhh... 17th.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BRK/2013.html


According to ESPN/Hollinger, tied for 18th.



Looks like Favors loses.

Guppyfighter
04-18-2013, 09:17 PM
Hollinger - using advanced stats - had the W's at 40-42, finishing 10th, and POST Harden trade had the Rockets tied for the 11th spot at 37-45. He had the Knicks as a 7th seed, and likely missed wildly on a few more. Those are the ones I checked.

But in general, he does do the best job predicting. It's just still a mess.


That's because he predicted Curry to miss games. He said we'd get in if we were healthy.

Backstabber
04-18-2013, 09:20 PM
You'd think Denver came out of nowhere to have a miracle season, Karl deserves coach of the year hands down. Wait, they were picked to win the division.

They're underachievers.

Backstabber
04-18-2013, 09:25 PM
Hawkeye, suckered him into that one. LOL, DMF better not show up during the playoffs if he's not wearing that Wolves logo.

enitialdee
04-18-2013, 10:46 PM
Rockets last in the west?? Dang that's harsh, I know it's before he Harden trade, but even before Harden they were always a budging playoff team.. 9th 10th seed, that's way they always get those useless 14th pick. Mad props to them though, and the worriors..

Chronz
04-18-2013, 10:53 PM
Hawkeye needs to bump that thread ASAP.

BirdIsTheWord
04-18-2013, 11:03 PM
Pretty darn close regarding the Nuggets. Don't know why they'd have us at #1 though with Westbrook/KD/Harden on the Thunder at that time.

DrDre94
04-18-2013, 11:08 PM
DMF is a no-show lol

PacersForLife
04-18-2013, 11:35 PM
Still baffled at how they had us at 8th... That was even with a healthy Granger I believe.

tredigs
04-18-2013, 11:46 PM
Why did Bsox close that other prediction thread that I bumped (by accident, actually. but still). What fun is it to make pages of predictions if we don't look back and see how we did? If there's ever an old thread worthy of bumping, that's it. Calm down with the "forum rules" people.

JasonJohnHorn
04-18-2013, 11:46 PM
The East was admittedly hard to call, and injuries tanked some teams (Philly, Boston), but there was NO reason to expect ATL would finish second when they had just given up their leading scoring to shed a contract. I think most reasonable people expected them to drop down the latter. And they gave NO respect to the Pacers... wtf? I understand misjudgning the Nets because they had a lot of new pieces and did benefit from Boston and Philly sliding down the ranks because of injuries.

As for the west... WOW!! No respect for the Spurs. The T-Wolves... I think they were TOO optimistic... obviously they would have been a playoff team with a healthy roster, btu we knew going in that Rubio was going to miss half the season and that Roy was unlikely to play the entire season. He was an experiment. Obviosuly the Lakers struggled was unexpected. I don't know how they had the T-wolves finishing over the Clippers? No respect for the Clips. They were spot on with the Mavs though... and OKC... they were almost a lock for 60 wins at the start... Most people underestimated the Warriors so can't fault them there, but Denver at the top of the conference?

JasonJohnHorn
04-18-2013, 11:49 PM
Still baffled at how they had us at 8th... That was even with a healthy Granger I believe.

Yeah... that was crazy. I had the Pacers right behind Miami to start the season and had they been healthy i think they would have been.


It's almost as crazy as putting Nuggets ahead of the Spurs and the T-wolves ahead of the Clippers.

Bravo95
04-19-2013, 12:06 AM
I'm impressed my own predictions were so close.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?767991-With-rosters-pretty-much-set-rank-your-top-8-seedings-for-both-conferences&p=23882099#post23882099

The Lakers and Knicks make me look bad, but the rest were pretty damn close. If the Rondo and Bynum injuries hadn't happened, they'd look even better.

What's really funny is that my 2-7 prediction for the West is identical to the actual 1-6.
Good thread. Some real gems in there...

Bucks and Hawks have somewhat better front 5... Toronto has better overall team.

You better find someone better than Korver to start at the 3 lol

I think Atlanta and Toronto may be on par for the starting 5, but Toronto has a better bench and a better coach so they get the nod.

IversonIsKrazy
04-19-2013, 01:58 AM
hawks 2nd?
twolves 3rd?
nuggets 1st?
Indy 8th?
Wtf were they smoking. Going into the season I remember I though;
1. Miami
2. Indy
3. Boston
4. NYK
5. NJN
6. Sixers
7. Bulls
8. Hawks

1. OKC
2. LAL
3. Spurs
4. Clippers
5. Grizzlies
6. Nuggets
7. Mavs
8. Warriors.

ESPN sucks.

Guppyfighter
04-19-2013, 02:07 AM
1. Spurs
2. Thunders
3. Nuggets
4. Lakers
5. Grizzlies
6. Clippers
7. Jazz
8. Warriors

1. Heat
2. Pacers
3. Celtics
4. Sixers
5. Hawks
6. Knicks
7. Bulls
8. Bucks

Biggest blunder was sixers and nets. Everything else seemed not horrible?

LakersIn5
04-19-2013, 03:10 AM
i had from what i remember

okc
lal
lac
sas

as my top 4 in the west. the rest i forgot.