Predictions 2013-14

[Mike G]

This is my first pass, ignoring the possible impact of rookies, for the time being: Assuming the veterans appearing on the rosters at this time are to take all the minutes available.

Code: Select all

West   W   L       East   W   L
LAC   59   23      Brk   63   19
Okl   57   25      Mia   58   24
Den   52   30      Ind   54   28
Mem   52   30      NYK   49   33
Hou   51   31      Det   47   35
Dal   49   33      Chi   46   36
Min   46   36      Cle   44   38
SAS   44   38      Atl   42   40

GSW   43   39      Tor   37   45
NOH   38   44      Mil   34   48
Por   35   47      Was   34   48
Sac   34   48      Cha   32   50
LAL   30   52      Orl   26   56
Phx   20   62      Bos   24   58
Uta   11   71      Phl   21   61

The bottom teams in each conference, and to an extent the next-lowest teams, have serious roster issues. I can't imagine who's going to fill the minutes for these teams.
Assigning a total of 242 minutes per game for each team, I just wasn't able to stretch those teams' veterans to 242. Their predicted totals therefore assume more than a few replacement-level minutes every game.

In this listing, West teams average 41.3 wins, East 40.7

The default maximum mpg (over 82 games) was 32. A handful of players are assigned 34: Horford, Rondo, Deng, LeBron, Westbrook, Thad Young, Evan Turner. Those last 2 out of dire necessity.
Durant alone I gave 36 minutes.

Later I'll assign minutes and eWins to rookies, based on their draft position. If I have time, that is.

[J.E.]

Vegas lines are here

http://www.pinnaclesports.com/ContestCa ... Lines.aspx (might need to scroll down)

although they don't, currently, list the Lakers or Nets


Comparing theirs to yours, it seems you have Dallas, MIN, DET high
GSW, Chicago low and Spurs, Jazz extremely low

[Mike G]

Jazz are extremely low. I have no idea how they're supposed to fill 240 minutes a night. Guys on their roster totaled 126 minutes (*82) last year. Hayward might be good for 30 minutes. The rest of their main men are all gone, replaced by almost no one. As they find some more players, I'll redo.

Most of the Spurs' best players aren't reliable for big minutes. Last year, over 82 games, Duncan averaged 25 minutes, Parker 27, Ginobili 17, Leonard 22. They lost Neal and Blair, gave up on Jackson last year.

As I said, I haven't begun to look at rookies. But I've allotted minutes to some weak players, whomever they turn out to be.

The Bulls lost Rip, Nate, and Belli; they have to hope Rose is good again. I arbitrarily figured he's at 1.50 eW/484 and for 30 mpg (including DNP's). If he returns to his 2012 form, they win 6 or 7 more games. If he also averages 36 min., they win 56. The uncertainty is extreme.

GS was very injury free last year, other than Bogut -- I've more than doubled his minutes, to 22.
I might suppose Curry plays more than 32 mpg. He's done it twice in 4 years.

Dallas is thick with talent. I count 8 above-avg players, plus Devin Harris. Everyone's minutes will have to be reduced from last year. I give Ellis 30 mpg (down from 38), Dirk and Marion 28 (from 31 and 30), etc.

Minny won 31 last year with Love playing just 18 games; Rubio missed 25, Peko 20. They've added Kevin Martin and Corey Brewer, good players off the bench. D Williams may be due to take off. A 15-win improvement isn't outrageous, ignoring their tradition of mediocre.

For the Pistons, I upped Drummond's minutes to 24 (from 21 last year), and everyone else plays less. Jennings and Josh Smith are pretty good. Or, I guess we will see how they all mesh.

[mark kieffer]

Is tempo/pace factored into your predictions? Denver for example is going to be more of a half-court team that is focusing on defense, instead of the Karl run and gun style of play they implemented these last few seasons.

[Mike G]

No. How would one factor in such a thing?
I'm not speculating on individual player pace preferences. Per minute or per possession, is it a big distinction?

[mark kieffer]

No. How would one factor in such a thing?
I'm not speculating on individual player pace preferences. Per minute or per possession, is it a big distinction?

Maybe it's too much work... But Denver was the 5th most efficient team in the league with the 2nd fastest pace.... But they were also 4th worst in offensive rebound rate. I just figure slowing down the pace, downgrading their roster (Foye for Iguodala), and not rebounding great would result in a less efficient offense... Last year, Denver's defense was mediocre and they lost their best defensive player in place of a crappy defender.

To project them to win over 50 seems like a big stretch, IMO. Maybe one would have to know more about each team to do a really detailed projection.

[Mike G]

Well, they won 57 last year, so I'm predicting a dropoff to 52.
At center, they lost Koufos, who played 22 mpg; and gained Hickson, who went 29. I give him 24 to go with McGee (18) and Mozgov (6).
They also added Darrell Arthur to the frontcourt, and I give him his 12 mpg. Nate Robinson to the backcourt, and I cut him from 25 min. in Chicago, to 18. Basically everybody has to do fewer minutes to accommodate the new guys.
Wilson Chandler should not miss half the season. Good players and backups at every position. Nothing wrong with this team.

They were good before Iggy, and they should be good after.

[mark kieffer]

McGee is going to play over 30 mins a game, and is a functional idiot. Nate Robinson isn't going to play 18 mins a game as long as Miller is there. Also, have you ever watched Randy Foye play basketball before?

[mark kieffer]

I will place a $50 bet on anybody that wants to take the over on the Nuggets for 50 wins. Rookie head coach, downgrade of roster, playing a style that doesn't quite fit the personnel.

[Mike G]

...have you ever watched Randy Foye play basketball before?

I should say not. But he's played consistently 24-35 mpg for Dwane Casey, Randy Wittman, Kevin McHale, Flip Saunders, Vinny del Negro, and Ty Corbin -- all of whom know a lot more about basketball than I would ever hope to know.

I might put 100 times as much effort into analyzing the minutia, and come up with a 1% better estimate. Bad trade-off, as I see it. Like a full time job for no pay.

I could always use $50, however. Message me privately for that.

[talkingpractice]

That Utah number is the one that's really off in this list. Even with the Burke injury (I know thats not in the current model anyway), and the likely tanking. All the young kids are going to be better.

The line has settled at ~25 offshore now, down from 27.5 a few weeks ago when they opened first (at LV Hilton). It's nearly impossible for the true line on them to not be between 20-30.

[talkingpractice]

and omg SAS (didnt see that one). OP is going to try to bet you $60 on that one.

[mark kieffer]

and omg SAS (didnt see that one). OP is going to try to bet you $60 on that one.

To be fair, Utah and SAS are both hard to model...... Utah will rely on young guys, and guys who had limited minutes in the past.

With SAS, you know they are going to have to rest guys. Hard to know how many games each of Duncan and Manu are going to play. I would guess that if SAS was below a Top 4 spot, Pop would play those guys more than if it looked clear they had a Top 4 spot.....

[Mike G]

Ha. I just noticed that I gave up on filling Utah minutes, at 212 per game. Still looking for 30 mpg from some more players.
The default is to fill those minutes with 'replacement players', which I consider to add zero wins. Even late-1st-round rookies are likely better than that.

I see they got the 14th pick and the 21st; traded both for the 9th pick. This doesn't seem much better than average, so their standing amongst the other teams may not be improved by their rookies.

Mostly I wanted to get the 'first pass' out there to stir the pot and suggest that some teams should be expected to dramatically rise or fall. Some teams always do, in fact.

[mark kieffer]

What did you use for Favors, Kanter, Jefferson, and Hayward?