Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 80
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000

    Kevin Pelton's 2018-2019 predictions (based on RPM)

    http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/stor...-teams-2018-19

    ESPN Kevin Pelton's predictions for next season's records:

    Eastern:
    1 Toronto Raptors 55.1
    2 Boston Celtics 53.2
    3 Philadelphia 76ers 47.8
    4 Indiana Pacers 45.7
    5 Milwaukee Bucks 45.2
    6 Miami Heat 44.8
    7 Washington Wizards 43.6
    8 Detroit Pistons 39.4
    9 Charlotte Hornets 38.3
    10 Brooklyn Nets 36.8
    11 Orlando Magic 33.6
    12 Cleveland Cavaliers 31.0
    13 New York Knicks 30.8
    14 Chicago Bulls 28.0
    15 Atlanta Hawks 25.9

    Western:
    1 Golden State Warriors 58.6
    2 Utah Jazz 53.4
    3 Houston Rockets 53.0
    4 Denver Nuggets 50.5
    5 Minnesota Timberwolves 49.6
    6 Oklahoma City Thunder 47.2
    7 New Orleans Pelicans 44.1
    8 Portland Trail Blazers 42.0
    9 L.A. Lakers 41.2
    10 San Antonio Spurs 38.5
    11 LA Clippers 35.5
    12 Memphis Grizzlies 33.1
    13 Dallas Mavericks 32.1
    14 Phoenix Suns 27.2
    15 Sacramento Kings 25.4

    The Lakers matched team in the East is the Hornets, and the Spurs match up with the Nets. Wow the east looks weak.
    Last edited by Scoots; 08-03-2018 at 08:36 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/stor...-teams-2018-19

    ESPN Kevin Pelton's predictions for next season's records:

    Eastern:
    1 Toronto Raptors 55.1
    2 Boston Celtics 53.2
    3 Philadelphia 76ers 47.8
    4 Indiana Pacers 45.7
    5 Milwaukee Bucks 45.2
    6 Miami Heat 44.8
    7 Washington Wizards 43.6
    8 Detroit Pistons 39.4
    9 Charlotte Hornets 38.3
    10 Brooklyn Nets 36.8
    11 Orlando Magic 33.6
    12 Cleveland Cavaliers 31.0
    13 New York Knicks 30.8
    14 Chicago Bulls 28.0
    15 Atlanta Hawks 25.9

    Western:
    1 Golden State Warriors 58.6
    2 Utah Jazz 53.4
    3 Houston Rockets 53.0
    4 Denver Nuggets 50.5
    5 Minnesota Timberwolves 49.6
    6 Oklahoma City Thunder 47.2
    7 New Orleans Pelicans 44.1
    8 Portland Trail Blazers 42.0
    9 L.A. Lakers 41.2
    10 San Antonio Spurs 38.5
    11 LA Clippers 35.5
    12 Memphis Grizzlies 33.1
    13 Dallas Mavericks 32.1
    14 Phoenix Suns 27.2
    15 Sacramento Kings 25.4

    The Lakers matched team in the East is the Hornets, and the Spurs match up with the Nets. Wow the east looks weak.
    Lol at the Celtics getting worse.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    Lol at the Celtics getting worse.
    I'm guessing he was projecting the total record down for the Celtics not on them getting worse but on the competition getting better resulting in some more losses.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I'm guessing he was projecting the total record down for the Celtics not on them getting worse but on the competition getting better resulting in some more losses.
    The Celtics got better too though. Iíd be shocked if their record ends up being worse (barring injuries). Their starting lineup is 5 guys who could legitimately make the all-star game, and their bench of Rozier-Smart-Morris-Theis-Baynes is stacked. Theyíre talented and deep. Canít see them being worse, even if competition got a little better.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    The Celtics got better too though. Iíd be shocked if their record ends up being worse (barring injuries). Their starting lineup is 5 guys who could legitimately make the all-star game, and their bench of Rozier-Smart-Morris-Theis-Baynes is stacked. Theyíre talented and deep. Canít see them being worse, even if competition got a little better.
    My point was that a team can both be better AND have a worse record.

    He has the Rockets getting 12 games "worse" which seems extreme, but it's not about the Rockets being worse as much as it is about the bottom of the west getting much better and there are only so many wins to go around.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    My point was that a team can both be better AND have a worse record.

    He has the Rockets getting 12 games "worse" which seems extreme, but it's not about the Rockets being worse as much as it is about the bottom of the west getting much better and there are only so many wins to go around.
    The Rockets did get worse though, and it can be argued they overachieved win-total wise. How can you argue that for the Celtics with all the injuries they faced throughout the year?

    You really think a full season of Kyrie and Hayward is anywhere close to upgrades other teams made? On paper the Celtics should increase their wins.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    The Rockets did get worse though, and it can be argued they overachieved win-total wise. How can you argue that for the Celtics with all the injuries they faced throughout the year?

    You really think a full season of Kyrie and Hayward is anywhere close to upgrades other teams made? On paper the Celtics should increase their wins.
    I'm saying that a team can get better AND have a worse record. That's all. The Celtics played a lot of games against the 9 tanking teams last year, and the teams not tanking who were just bad, most of those games will be tougher this year, even though the team is better they will likely lose some of those games. They may have a better record, they may have the same record, they may have a worse record, all while also being a better team overall.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I'm saying that a team can get better AND have a worse record. That's all. The Celtics played a lot of games against the 9 tanking teams last year, and the teams not tanking who were just bad, most of those games will be tougher this year, even though the team is better they will likely lose some of those games. They may have a better record, they may have the same record, they may have a worse record, all while also being a better team overall.
    I know what youíre saying, and Iím telling you in relation to the Celtics in makes no sense.

    What team can say they had a better off-season than keeping an ECF team together while adding Hayward+Irving? Not one team.

    Youíre saying teams who had a worse off-season will have a better chance of beating the Celtics than they did last year. Thatís is... wow.

    On-paper, predicting the Celtics to get worse doesnít work.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    I know what youíre saying, and Iím telling you in relation to the Celtics in makes no sense.

    What team can say they had a better off-season than keeping an ECF team together while adding Hayward+Irving? Not one team.

    Youíre saying teams who had a worse off-season will have a better chance of beating the Celtics than they did last year. Thatís is... wow.

    On-paper, predicting the Celtics to get worse doesnít work.
    Because a team getting better isn't always reflected in their record. The margins for all teams this year will be tighter in part because last year was such an aberation with so many teams trying to lose.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,784
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    I know what youíre saying, and Iím telling you in relation to the Celtics in makes no sense.

    What team can say they had a better off-season than keeping an ECF team together while adding Hayward+Irving? Not one team.

    Youíre saying teams who had a worse off-season will have a better chance of beating the Celtics than they did last year. Thatís is... wow.

    On-paper, predicting the Celtics to get worse doesnít work.
    Disagree. Toronto had a better off-season. I think OKC had a better off-season. The Lakers, clearly.

    What did the Celtics win last year? 55? I will take the under on that this year if anyone is interested in a wager



    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Jamiecballer; 08-06-2018 at 01:41 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    Disagree. Toronto had a better off-season. I think OKC had a better off-season. The Lakers, clearly.

    What did the Celtics win last year? 55? I will take the under on that this year if anyone is interested in a wager
    And it's not just about who had a better off-season, but who got better overall this off-season, and all factors included a lot of teams got better with health (Celtics, and Grizz at least), with modest projected growth of youth, with draft picks, with free agents, and a big one is with the end of the massive glut of tanking. It stands to reason that a lot of top teams who got better are not going to have better records this year.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Because a team getting better isn't always reflected in their record. The margins for all teams this year will be tighter in part because last year was such an aberation with so many teams trying to lose.
    Except weíre talking about on paper. At the end of the season their record may be the same or worse but to predict that on paper doesnít make sense.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    1,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    Disagree. Toronto had a better off-season. I think OKC had a better off-season. The Lakers, clearly.

    What did the Celtics win last year? 55? I will take the under on that this year if anyone is interested in a wager



    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    How are any of those offseasons better than adding two all-star top 25 players without losing a single rotation player?

    The Lakers maybe just because of the LeBron effect but the others absolutely not.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    Except weíre talking about on paper. At the end of the season their record may be the same or worse but to predict that on paper doesnít make sense.
    Why? Pelton is looking at the changes to all the teams and predicting their records based on their upcoming schedules. If a bad team gets better each win they get comes from another team. Some of them, when a lot of the league got better, are going to come from the better teams too.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    25,784
    Quote Originally Posted by ZH721 View Post
    How are any of those offseasons better than adding two all-star top 25 players without losing a single rotation player?

    The Lakers maybe just because of the LeBron effect but the others absolutely not.
    The Raptors traded a guy who has been a net positive one time in 9 years for a guy who has a legit argument to be the best player in the game after Lebron, if healthy.

    Boston, btw, and I hear this all the time, is not adding 2 all-stars, they are adding 1. Please dont give me any horseshit about ECF, as if we didn't get a good picture of what the Celtics were with Irving over an 82 game season. Very good but statistically not quite as good as Toronto. That is what you are adding 1 all-star, Hayward to.

    Boston will be very tough, but I'm not living in this world where we forget that Boston still lost to a less than formidable Cavs team and yes, we were swept by them - and that may have caused people to temporarily forget that Cleveland didnt look like much - but Toronto wilted everytime they faced Lebron, for sure, and the guy who inarguably performed worst is the one we swapped Leonard for. Fortuitous indeed.

    Granted there is a concern for how the team will respond for a new coach, but swapping Leonard for DeRozan is way bigger than adding Hayward (does he not play Tatums position?) in my opinion.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Jamiecballer; 08-06-2018 at 11:31 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •