Celts projected for 47 Wins by SI

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Not to rain on everyone's parade, but I'm skeptical that 47 wins is attainable.

• I agree that having Amir and Lee and a full season of Isaiah and Crowder are positives, but 47 wins is an improvement of 7 wins, and would mean going from 2 games under .500 to 12 games over .500—that's a fairly sizable jump in one season, particularly when working several new guys into the mix.

• Last year's scrappy, upstart Celtics surprised a lot of opponents. It's likely that opponents will be prepared for them this season.

• Last year's Celtics were playing with house money, with nothing to lose. There's going to be some pressure on them this year, some higher expectations, and many of the guys don't have much experience with that and may not handle it well (then again, they might handle it just fine).

I like this team and certainly hope for the best. I just think people shouldn't get their hopes too high just yet.

P.S.: There's no way the Celtics finish within 4 games of Cleveland.

47 wins is just 6 games above 500, not 12 games.

Hm. I guess that depends on one's interpretation. I think you're looking at it as: a .500 record at the end of the season would be 41-41, so 47 wins would be 6 more than 41. But adding 6 wins also means subtracting 6 losses, so a team with 47 wins (and thus 35 losses) would (theoretically, if the season was longer) have to lose 12 games in a row to get back down to .500 at 47-47.

I double-checked my view with a couple co-workers who are big sports guys, and they agree with me. I also just read an ESPN story in which Gordon Edes says that the 42-52 Red Sox are 10 games under .500.

Not that I want to get in an argument over this. Take it for what you will.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Not to rain on everyone's parade, but I'm skeptical that 47 wins is attainable.

• I agree that having Amir and Lee and a full season of Isaiah and Crowder are positives, but 47 wins is an improvement of 7 wins, and would mean going from 2 games under .500 to 12 games over .500—that's a fairly sizable jump in one season, particularly when working several new guys into the mix.

• Last year's scrappy, upstart Celtics surprised a lot of opponents. It's likely that opponents will be prepared for them this season.

• Last year's Celtics were playing with house money, with nothing to lose. There's going to be some pressure on them this year, some higher expectations, and many of the guys don't have much experience with that and may not handle it well (then again, they might handle it just fine).

I like this team and certainly hope for the best. I just think people shouldn't get their hopes too high just yet.

P.S.: There's no way the Celtics finish within 4 games of Cleveland.

I don't agree with the teams will be prepared for them. They surprised opponents because of how hard they played. They played hard because of the makeup of who is on the team. It's not like the actions the C's run are revolutionary, a ton of teams run multiple pick and rolls and a spread system like they do.

In general a lot of people want to negate the finish to the season by saying 1. The teams the Celtics were playing didn't have anything to play for 2. We surprised teams through effort and we won't be able to this season.

As far as #1 is concerned the Celtics beat a lot of teams who were playing for playoff positioning. They also fared better against bad teams in the second half, and it's not like those teams had much to play for in the first half of the season.

For #2 it is true that the C's won more games than people thought due to great effort. The reason for this effort was who the C's had on their team. With a team comprised completely of gritty hard working guys why would it be any different this year?

People discount our second half success because it doesn't fit their notion that NBA teams win solely based on the star played they have. The fact of the matter is the C's played better in the second half because they got a group of players together that fit well and played hard. All those players besides Bass are still on the team so I don't see why that wouldn't continue.

Another factor in improvement is that on average players improve statistically until they turn 28 and since our whole team is essentially under 28 I expect internal growth to spur improvement.

I totally agree that they fit well together and played hard, and that most of these guys are still young enough so that we should see improvement from them this season. When I referenced opponents being prepared this time around, I wasn't thinking about strategy (pick-and-rolls and such); I was thinking of how opponents probably looked at Boston's roster, so no big names, and therefore probably didn't expect much competition. But now that those teams know that the Celtics work well together and play hard, they won't assume an easy victory, and we'll begin to see some of the limitations of "grit + determination - elite talent."

But like I said, I want them to do well, and I hope they do. I'd consider anything above .500 progress and a pretty good season, so 47 wins would be great.

[Robb]

47 wins is about right. I don't think they're a 54 win team like their end of season pace was, I don't think they're a 28 win team like the beginning of their season pace was. 47 wins is saying they're a .500 team that has a 24-12 streak in them.

[mahonedog88]

47 wins I actually think is a pretty accurate assessment of what this team will be.  Given their offseason thus far, anything less than 45 wins is a failure of a season in my opinion.  They've added veterans on the frontline in Johnson and Lee, they've brought back guys to round out a pretty solid bench with IT, Crowder, and Jerebko. 

Sullinger should be motivated to prove people wrong this year because you gotta figure he's sick and tired of hearing people knock him on his weight and such...even though it's warranted.  There looks to be potential for all their draft picks from this year.  Bradley improved on his offense, hopefully only that gets better.  Given how Smart was playing in the summer league before his injury, he should take a step forward.

Oh, and after only 2 years, the coach has confirmed to us that he's darn good at what he does.

When you look close enough, there's no excuse for this team to not be above .500 and a battle for a division championship should at least be interesting this season.

[D.o.s.]

^ you think any of the other teams in the Atlantic are actively trying to win it?

[slamtheking]

I think 47 is waaay too optimistic.  would need a lot of teams considered better than us to perform a lot worse than expected. 

I think 35-38 is more likely.

[Moranis]

Any methodology that projects the Raptors at 52.9 wins and the Cavs at 51.4 wins should just be disregarded as nonsense.

[PhoSita]

I agree with Moranis.


For what it's worth, I did a quick calculation using Win Shares / 48 numbers and estimates of playing time and I got 41.95 WS combined for the main 9 or 10 guys in the rotation.  That seems a lot more reasonable to me.

[mahonedog88]

^ you think any of the other teams in the Atlantic are actively trying to win it?

I don't understand your question.  Is that sarcasm?  I mean, obviously all teams want to win.  Compared to rest of the divisions, I don't think the Atlantic will be that good.  Less than 50 wins won it this past season, and I don't see that changing.  Take the Sixers out obviously.

I'm of the mindset personally, and unfortunately, that the Nets could be better than people think.  I personally think the Deron Williams move is addition by subtraction.  When healthy, Brook Lopez is a very solid player, and Lionel Hollins is a pretty good coach.  The Raptors, albeit a soft team in the postseason, added Demarre Carroll, may take a small step back, but I think will still challenge for the division.  The Knicks, with Melo back, and adding some people will be better and probably steal a game or two from the Cs.

I think it's completely realistic that the Celtics should compete for the division.  But I also don't think it'll be a walkover.  It'll be entertaining, I'll put it that way.

[TheTruthFot18]

http://www.si.com/nba/2015/07/16/nba-standings-predictions-hornets-thunder-celtics-blazers-mavericks

We end up with the 5th (BKN), 14th (DAL) and 20th (BOS) picks and the top 2 picks in the second round (PHI, MIN).

I like those picks. Those are definitely more attractive than #16, #28, and #33 if we need to move them.

It all looks good except the top of the EC, it's Cleveland or maybe Chicago 1st. 

[mahonedog88]

I think 47 is waaay too optimistic.  would need a lot of teams considered better than us to perform a lot worse than expected. 

I think 35-38 is more likely.

They're back with virtually the same team that won 40 last year, plus have added Amir Johnson and David Lee.  They better win at least the same amount this season as last.  There's giving the team TOO much credit, but there's also not giving them enough.  And I don't think you're giving them enough.

[D.o.s.]

^ you think any of the other teams in the Atlantic are actively trying to win it?

I don't understand your question.  Is that sarcasm?  I mean, obviously all teams want to win.  Compared to rest of the divisions, I don't think the Atlantic will be that good.  Less than 50 wins won it this past season, and I don't see that changing.  Take the Sixers out obviously.

I'm of the mindset personally, and unfortunately, that the Nets could be better than people think.  I personally think the Deron Williams move is addition by subtraction.  When healthy, Brook Lopez is a very solid player, and Lionel Hollins is a pretty good coach.  The Raptors, albeit a soft team in the postseason, added Demarre Carroll, may take a small step back, but I think will still challenge for the division.  The Knicks, with Melo back, and adding some people will be better and probably steal a game or two from the Cs.

I think it's completely realistic that the Celtics should compete for the division.  But I also don't think it'll be a walkover.  It'll be entertaining, I'll put it that way.

Ok, I agree with you -- not sarcasm, just underdeveloped. I just don't see Brooklyn, New York, or even Toronto seriously competing next season, that might be some unnecessary shade on Toronto but I think they're engaged in the start of a quiet retooling year. Obvs. the 76ers aren't a real NBA team.

I.e. I think the C's win by default with 40-ish wins +/- 4 games or so.

[Irish Stew]

47 wins seems a bit ambitious since we really didn't address our two biggest needs, rim protection and a small forward scorer, but maybe the East is still bad enough and our depth at guard and power forward is great enough.

[mahonedog88]

^ you think any of the other teams in the Atlantic are actively trying to win it?

I don't understand your question.  Is that sarcasm?  I mean, obviously all teams want to win.  Compared to rest of the divisions, I don't think the Atlantic will be that good.  Less than 50 wins won it this past season, and I don't see that changing.  Take the Sixers out obviously.

I'm of the mindset personally, and unfortunately, that the Nets could be better than people think.  I personally think the Deron Williams move is addition by subtraction.  When healthy, Brook Lopez is a very solid player, and Lionel Hollins is a pretty good coach.  The Raptors, albeit a soft team in the postseason, added Demarre Carroll, may take a small step back, but I think will still challenge for the division.  The Knicks, with Melo back, and adding some people will be better and probably steal a game or two from the Cs.

I think it's completely realistic that the Celtics should compete for the division.  But I also don't think it'll be a walkover.  It'll be entertaining, I'll put it that way.

Ok, I agree with you -- not sarcasm, just underdeveloped. I just don't see Brooklyn, New York, or even Toronto seriously competing next season, that might be some unnecessary shade on Toronto but I think they're engaged in the start of a quiet retooling year. Obvs. the 76ers aren't a real NBA team.

I.e. I think the C's win by default with 40-ish wins +/- 4 games or so.

Ok, sorry, but I can't go that far.  The only time in the last 15 years that a team won this division with less than 47 wins was the Celtics in 04-05 with 45 wins.  In the Central division the last 15 years, no team has won the division with less than 49 wins.  Since 04 when the Southeast division was created, the Heat won the division in 06-07 and 11-12 with 44 and 46 wins.  Besides that, it never got below 52 wins.

I just can't foresee a division winner having 36-44 wins, based on your 40 +/- 4 games prediction.  Maybe, maybe 44 wins, but that's it.

And trust me, I hope I'm wrong about the Nets.  And realistically the Knicks probably aren't contenders either.

[Evantime34]

I agree with Moranis.


For what it's worth, I did a quick calculation using Win Shares / 48 numbers and estimates of playing time and I got 41.95 WS combined for the main 9 or 10 guys in the rotation.  That seems a lot more reasonable to me.

That is interesting, I'm going to do my own calculation and post it here later. I looked and the players after the 10th spot produced 8.2 wins last year, so just doing the top 10 might not make sense.