Kevin Pelton (ESPN insider): Blazers projected 42-40

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
PtldPlatypus said:
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...otals-standings-every-nba-team-2017-18-season

- West - - East
1. GSW - 1. BOS
2. HOU - 2. CLE
3. SAS - 3. WAS
4. MIN - 4. MIL
5. OKC - 5. CHA
6. LAC - 6. TOR
7. DEN - 7. MIA
8. UTA - 8. DET
9. NOP - 9. PHI
10. POR- 10. ORL
11. DAL- 11. IND
12. MEM- 12. NYK
13. LAL- 13. BRK
14. PHX- 14. CHI
15. SAC- 15. ATL
Click to expand...

Interesting that Neil gets so much grief, that Pelton really deserves. "Regression to the Mean" apparently means, "Our projections keep fucking up. Maybe they suck. But, what the hell, we've got to produce content, so here what they say this year...."
 
Wizard Mentor said:
Interesting that Neil gets so much grief, that Pelton really deserves. "Regression to the Mean" apparently means, "Our projections keep fucking up. Maybe they suck. But, what the hell, we've got to produce content, so here what they say this year...."
Click to expand...

One of the weaknesses of this forum is that it only allows one like.
 
e_blazer said:
It’s funny how the narrative around here is often about how injuries helped the Blazers last season. Our all-NBA starting point guard missed one-ninth of the season last year. Our starting power forward missed 13 games. Our starting small forward only played 59 games. Turner and Harkless were both injured in the playoffs, but nobody seems to mention that fact when pointing out how the Blazers were swept by the Pelicans.
Click to expand...

Injuries DID help us last year. It can be both.
 
Wizard Mentor said:
Interesting that Neil gets so much grief, that Pelton really deserves. "Regression to the Mean" apparently means, "Our projections keep fucking up. Maybe they suck. But, what the hell, we've got to produce content, so here what they say this year...."
Click to expand...

So, regression to the mean is a catch all excuse for journalists, but for a GM it's just cause to get fired. For a GM, the team needs to keep improving or your head is on the chopping block. I wish journalists were held to the same standard. Canzano would have been gone long ago.

BNM
 
Strenuus said:
Injuries DID help us last year. It can be both.
Click to expand...

Of course, but it’s rather disingenuous to only mention the opponents’ injuries and use that as a way of disparaging the Blazers’ success.
 
HCP said:
I was going to go with 40-42.
Click to expand...

I suppose that's better than the year you predicted 23 wins. You're the Kevin Pelton of this forum., always underestimating this team.

Have you ever predicted the Blazers would win more games than the actually did? I suppose if you always lower your expectations, you'll never be disappointed.

BNM
 
Boob-No-More said:
I'd say, accurately, that we were the 3rd fastest to finish the race, and that's what counts. They don't give out medals to the leaders at the halfway or 2/3 way points. You place where you finish, not where you should have or could have finished.

I'd also advise against betting your hard earned money on players that are prone to run out in front of moving traffic. One advantage of a young team is fewer games missed due to injuries. Injury prone players don't help you win when they are sitting behind the bench in a suit.

You add a 33-year old Paul Millsap to your roster and expect him to perform like he did when he was 30, or even 32, you're setting yourself up to be disappointed. While injuries can happen to anyone, no one should be surprised that guys like Millsap missed time due to injury. Gobert isn't old, but he has missed significant parts of 3 of his 5 seasons in the league. Again, it should not come as a surprise that he missed a significant number of games last year. It's par for the course.

These preseason projection assume everyone will be healthy and perform near their career averages. Injuries are unpredictable, but you shouldn't just assume everyone will be healthy for 82 games. To me, it would make sense to weight player projects based on age and past injury history. It's not a perfect formula, but I think it would be more accurate than just assuming equal health for all 30 teams.

BNM
Click to expand...

I guess we just have a fundamentally different outlook on it.

Maybe finishing third would have had some validation if we had done something in the playoffs, but as Durant said... we played like an 8th seed. We didn't deserve that 3rd seed. It's fools gold.
 
e_blazer said:
The only place our roster got worse is the loss of Ed. Curry is an upgrade over Napier. Stauskas, Baldwin, Trent are an upgrade over Pat. Three point shooting should be markedly better than last year, which is critical in Stotts’ system. I think the amount that the loss of Ed is felt depends on how quickly Collins can expand his game. He definitely has more upside than Ed had. I’m also looking for better years from CJ, Nurk and Harkless. The amount of upgrade other teams in the West got remains to be proven on the court.
Click to expand...
This is where I am at.

(Please excuse the poor grammar ;) )
 
e_blazer said:
Of course, but it’s rather disingenuous to only mention the opponents’ injuries and use that as a way of disparaging the Blazers’ success.
Click to expand...

Timing would probably be the more accurate way of saying it.
 
Boob-No-More said:
I suppose that's better than the year you predicted 23 wins. You're the Kevin Pelton of this forum., always underestimating this team.

Have you ever predicted the Blazers would win more games than the actually did? I suppose if you always lower your expectations, you'll never be disappointed.

BNM
Click to expand...
The year I said 23, the Vegas line was the same or close I believe. So I don’t think I was too far off the opinions of others. And we seem to forget on here I nailed it the next season right. Closer than anybody else on here right?
 
HCP said:
The year I said 23, the Vegas line was the same or close I believe. So I don’t think I was too far off the opinions of others.
Click to expand...

You werent. I think they said 27? Or did you try to change yours to 27?

Anyhow, you are lowballing this year too. :)

And since when are you a follower?????????????Who cares what the opinions of others are. Strike your own pose and own it!
 
HCP said:
The year I said 23, the Vegas line was the same or close I believe. So I don’t think I was too far off the opinions of others. And we seem to forget on here I nailed it the next season right. Closer than anybody else on here right?
Click to expand...

Where you actually have access to more than we do, let me ask you of your opinion of this roster so far, and without significant changes, where do you see us finishing this year?
 
I don't see Denver or Minny finishing in front of us. I think we will be a better team, not worse and we should end up with 50+ wins. I look at Nurk and think he will get better which will make the team much better. I think the set shooters we added make more sense for our offense. I think Collins will improve by leaps and bounds, that will mean we improve at both ends. Pelton had us 10th in the West last season, so we already know how accurate his projections are.

Do I think we're a better team if we could trade CJ for equal value and a better fit? Yeah I do but I think we're definitely a playoff team without any moves.
 
blazerkor said:
I don't see Denver or Minny finishing in front of us. I think we will be a better team, not worse and we should end up with 50+ wins. I look at Nurk and think he will get better which will make the team much better. I think the set shooters we added make more sense for our offense. I think Collins will improve by leaps and bounds, that will mean we improve at both ends. Pelton had us 10th in the West last season, so we already know how accurate his projections are.

Do I think we're a better team if we could trade CJ for equal value and a better fit? Yeah I do but I think we're definitely a playoff team without any moves.
Click to expand...
agreed. But that won't be good enough for some in here. I wouldn't trade CJ for just anyone either.
 
Curry is definitely an upgrade over Napier, and does he not take into account Collins will improve? Or defense (Denver)?
 
52-30, unless there is an injury to Dame or Nurk. I like the progression of this team. I see the youth with more experience, and playing bigger roles. Dame continues to get better each year. I think CJ will bring more to the table as well. Let the media doubt them. More fuel for the fire. Go Blazers!
 
I’m still holding out hope there are moves to be made, my prediction right now would be 45-46 wins and land somewhere around 6-7th in the West.
 
Not sure how this team got "worse". Yes, missing Ed *should* be bad, but the improvement over the backup PG and SG will more than make up the difference. Plus, I'm not sure that Zach is as far away as others do.

Not saying Stauskusususlosopolis is a great addition, or that Curry is 6th man of the year material, but the players they're replacing? One was barely a fringe NBA player and the other was an undersized streaky PG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top