The season is about to start, and I wanted to ask the objective neutral Rocket fans of this forum what they think about Boston. Almost every analyst and journalist has come out and said that Boston will be top 4 seed in the East possibly reach top 2 even , and win around 50 games. This is their main rotation : Smart/IT Bradley/E.Turner Crowder/Jerebko D.Lee/Amir Johnson/Sullinger T.Zeller/Olynyk Do you think that this roster can win around 50 games? [Winning 50 games means that a team is beating good West teams as well as good Eastern teams.] p.s When I say every analyst it doesn't mean only Simmons. The only one who has reservations to this prediction is Seth Partnow. Can a team with good depth and good coaching but not a single all star or near all star or even one great starter win so many games? At least Atlanta had Horford and Millsap and Korver who had a historic year last season. Or is it a case of overhyping a big market team and east coast bias?
I barely see them making the playoffs with that roster, so many Eastern teams above them in my opinion. Maybe I underestimate Brad Stevens, no idea. Official Tizzle Prediction: 7-8 seed.
So the difference between a 40-42 Celtics team and a 50 win team is David Lee + more mature squad? I don't buy it. The analysts absolutely LOVE Brad Stevens. He's a very good coach that will undoubtedly get the best from his roster, but I don't buy that this roster has that kind of potential. Bottom line, no way Celtics overtake one of Cleveland, Chicago, Miami, Toronto or Atlanta. Of the other Eastern teams, I'd put my money on the Bucks maybe making the biggest jump.
Well the narrative is that after the I.T trade they went on a rampage after the ASW and they played like a good team and made the playoffs. BUT if you look at the results almost every of their wins came at tanking teams in April and March. They were 30-39 at 22 March and finished 41-41. However and this is something that is constantly overlooked in my opinion(also about the Jazz) in the end of March and in April half the league is tanking and half the East has already clinched playoff positions and is resting players already. They also won both their games vs the Cavs in April just because the Cavs wanted to have them as the playoff opponents and didn't even play their stars. Can you make any prediction based on that? Also the analytical people love them because of their depth. Most of the models are based on WARPS so a team of role players will be better than for example New Orleans. This is one of the common prediction that have come out based on analytical models. Boston as second seed with 51-52 wins. The problem I personally have with analytical models is that A) bench players dont' perform the same when they play against starters vs against other bench players B) The minutes of the game is fixed. You can't play 3 players 16 minutes because this way noone will get on rhythm and there will be locker room problems. And about Boston my problem is that they have only ONE single good defensive big who is Amir Johnson who every year has injury problems and that their playmaking is dreadful. But every single analytical model and journalist has come out and said that they will be top4 seed so taht's why I created this thread. Maybe I am missing something. I admit I am slightly biased against what I think it's constantly overhyped markets like Chicago and Boston. But to the best of my judgement I can't see such a team win 50 games.
Sorry they didn't finish 41-41 but 40-42.Not even a .500 team last year. Who knows maybe the analytical models are correct and all our eyes are wrong. It will be very interesting to revisit this thread during the season and see who's right. I hope if the models are wrong K.Pelton will come out and admit that his models are crap.
I am happy to be proven wrong, the league is a better comp when the celtics are strong. Will be interesting to see.
Isn't the over/under at 45 or something? I haven't heard many people predicting 50. They'll be good but not in the top 5. That's Cleveland, Atlanta, Washington, Miami, Chicago territory.
Boston has potential to be good. Not great obviously. They added Amir Johnson, the most underrated player in the league (besides DMo). They made the playoffs last year, obviously making it this year with the roster upgrade. I forgot, did NBA remove division winners have to be in top 4 rule this year already? If not they can be 4th seed, all they have to do is have a better record than Craptors.
I agree with everything here except my gut says the Bucks will not live up to expectations. Just have a weird feeling about them.
You are Kevin Pelton?:grin: And I disagree about the celtics need to be strong for a good league. The competition hasn't been stronger and more exciting and the NBA more popular aroudn the world, than now and a small market team like Cleveland was in the finals. Screw the Knicks, the Lakers, the Celtics and the Bulls. They enjoyed the advantage of stealing other teams' talent and having more money long enough. Now they got to win it the hard way like the rest of the league. I don't know about Vegas, but the analysts did say that Boston will win around 50 games. Here is Carmelo: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/nba-boston-celtics-preview-carmelo/ (48 wins) From Tom Haberstroh(espn): Even though he says he projects them to win 40 his analytical model says 51. Nylon Calculus:http://nyloncalculus.com/2015/10/22/2015-16-season-preview-boston-celtics/ (45.6-52) Nylon Calculus Nathan Walker: http://nyloncalculus.com/2015/10/24/2016-usage-adjusted-win-projections-part-2/ 51-52 Andrew Johnson of Nylon Calculus — who boasted some of the most accurate win projections last season — pegged them at 49, the third-best record in the Eastern Conference. http://nyloncalculus.com/2015/09/30/highly-plausible-nba-win-projections-2015-16/ So does Ian Levy from SI and K.Pelton has been on ther "bandwagon" from the start. Not only they abolished it, but as you may well know Amir Johnson has ankles made of glass. Good luck betting on him to be your sole rim protector for 82 games. Basically All analytical models and so every journalist who just looks at analytics to make prediction have Boston as 50 win team. (other strange prediction that most analytical models agree is that Miami will not get to 40 wins and that Portland will make the playoffs). Analytics vs the Eye test or vs bball logic. I don't see it and I'm a big analytics fan.
perhaps but two of their starters are now 20 y.o. You can't make predictions or projections with much confidence when the starters are so young. I don't expect anything one way or the other. But Boston is not that young. Only has one sophomore in the starting lineup and he's supposed to become their leader next year- according to Carmelo a near allstar.. There's no way that Olynyk at age 25(?) becomes a premier rim protector or that E.Turner learns to shoot or David Lee is not a hole at defence. That's why out of all the predictions that's the one I am more annoyed with. I have other disagreements with the common eastern projections but not as a big difference as with this one. 50 win team is near contender status and is projected to win enough matchups against the West contenders. Does anyone see such a lineup defeat the Rockets at full health in the regular season? Or the Clippers or the Warriors?
Only some analytics are useful, its an excuse for nerds who cant play the game to be able to getvclose to the game. These analytics say the Rockets who are one of, if not the most deep team is projected to do a little worse than last years team? The same Rockets team that added a borseline all star player at that? Dumbe analytics are dumb.
I'm no analyst but man, I don't see them being better than Toronto, Chicago, washington, bucks, hawks, pacers or heat... counting Cleveland that puts them competing for 8th with teams like the knicks, magic and hornets... I could be totally wrong, I just don't see it. It'll probably be something like 1. Cav's 2. Bulls 3. Washington 4. 5. 6. 7. Hawks, Toronto, Bucks, Heat (all interchangable probably) 8.Pacers (could argue they belong with other 4 competing for 4-8 spots if PG is PG) The East in my opinion isn't as talented as the West still but you can pretty much lock in the top 8 teams pretty easy. I don't see Boston cracking that top 8 I listed baring injuries to some of them which could happen.
After last nights whooping at the hands of the visiting Pistons, I wonder if todays Hawks are the new Hawks.
I don't see Boston being a 50 win team at all. They will likely hover around being a .500 team again.
Celtics remind me of the Post-Melo Nuggets. They have some really good guys and are 2 deep at every position with some really good guys. They just dont have that "game-changing" player on their squad. They'll make the playoffs in the east again. Stevens is a good coach for that team. I can see them making a move if a star is made available this season they have a lot of young talent and a hoard of draft picks to boot. I think 44-48 wins is a very realistic target for them
