Is there any reason we wont get a top 4 seed?

[Moranis]

I would be surprised if Boston passed Toronto in the Atlantic and downright shocked if Boston ended up in the top 4 overall.  Toronto was 9 games better than Boston last year.  Yeah they lost Amir and Lou Williams, but they added Carroll, Joseph, and Biyombo who I think add more than they lost especially to roster cohesion.  That is a lot of defensive intensity added and Carroll, especially, is an excellent outside shooter (Joseph is pretty good in his own regard).  I fully expect Toronto to be right around a 50 win team again and well ahead of every other Atlantic team, including Boston.

Continue to ignore the Celtics roster through the first 41 games was entirely different than the roster over the last 41 games..

Toronto was 9 games better, sure, but to bluntly state it like that without investigating/understanding the circumstances, your initial assessment already begins with a huge, glaring flaw.

With the Amir acquisition and a hopefully improving Smart and Crowder, the Celtics need to be setting themselves a goal of being a top 5-7 defense.

I'd like to see what Smart - Bradley - Crowder - Mickey/Jerebko - Amir could do defensively.

Me too.

And the roster Boston is sending out this year isn't the same one that finished the year.  You can talk all you want about roster cohesion, but you have no idea what this Boston roster is going to look like when the games actually start.

Toronto (barring injury or a major acquisition by Boston) will finish ahead of Boston.  I guarantee it.

[DarkAzcura]

I would be surprised if Boston passed Toronto in the Atlantic and downright shocked if Boston ended up in the top 4 overall.  Toronto was 9 games better than Boston last year.  Yeah they lost Amir and Lou Williams, but they added Carroll, Joseph, and Biyombo who I think add more than they lost especially to roster cohesion.  That is a lot of defensive intensity added and Carroll, especially, is an excellent outside shooter (Joseph is pretty good in his own regard).  I fully expect Toronto to be right around a 50 win team again and well ahead of every other Atlantic team, including Boston.

Continue to ignore the Celtics roster through the first 41 games was entirely different than the roster over the last 41 games..

Toronto was 9 games better, sure, but to bluntly state it like that without investigating/understanding the circumstances, your initial assessment already begins with a huge, glaring flaw.

With the Amir acquisition and a hopefully improving Smart and Crowder, the Celtics need to be setting themselves a goal of being a top 5-7 defense.

I'd like to see what Smart - Bradley - Crowder - Mickey/Jerebko - Amir could do defensively.

Me too.

And the roster Boston is sending out this year isn't the same one that finished the year.  You can talk all you want about roster cohesion, but you have no idea what this Boston roster is going to look like when the games actually start.

Toronto (barring injury or a major acquisition by Boston) will finish ahead of Boston.  I guarantee it.

I've already stated that there are plenty of questions about the Celtics roster, but if you can recognize the questions about the Celtics roster, you should be able to about Toronto's. If you are objective, which you clearly aren't being, then you cannot guarantee anything. Completely foolhardy to guarantee something like that based on the logic you are using. You aren't being consistent.

Your basis for believing Toronto will be around a 50 win team again is based on their season's performance last year. Your basis for believing Boston won't be similar is because they won 40 games last year. You are ignoring that the roster between the first half of the season is completely different than the one in the second half. The difference between the roster at the end of the season and now is not anywhere as significant as the roster changes the Celtics underwent in season. I have no idea why you are even attempting to compare the two indirectly. With the current Celtics roster, the Celtics were able to keep up pace with Toronto and even actually outpace them for half a season. That's not insignificant.

The only thing I'll bite on is that Toronto lost one of their most net positive defensive players guys in Amir while Boston lost one of their most net negative players this off-season in Bass. Boston's roster isn't the same as the one that ended the season, but it is pretty darn similar unlike most other East teams.

With that said, I have no idea why you are choosing to be so positive about Toronto's roster losses and additions but so negative about the Celtics' roster losses/additions. That's really all it boils down to.

[Tr1boy]

None. We will be a top 4 seed this season. 2nd is the east a possibility

This Celts squad will be tough to play. Game will never be over

[Moranis]

Toronto, with basically the same core, has won 48 and 49 games the last two years.  It is far from fool hardy or illogical to put Toronto right back in that range again.  What is illogical is somehow believing Boston is going to make that jump and get in that range with the changes made in the offseason.  And the thing with Toronto, they are also incredibly young.  Carroll and Lowry finished last year at the ripe old age of 28 and are by far the oldest players in that core.  Jonas was just 22.  Patterson and Derozan 25.  Ross 23.  Biyombo and Joseph 22/23.  Toronto is only going to get better.  In fact I'd peg them at 53 wins or so, well ahead of Boston who will be fighting for the playoffs while Toronto is fighting for home court for a round or two.

[DarkAzcura]

Toronto, with basically the same core, has won 48 and 49 games the last two years.  It is far from fool hardy or illogical to put Toronto right back in that range again.  What is illogical is somehow believing Boston is going to make that jump and get in that range with the changes made in the offseason.  And the thing with Toronto, they are also incredibly young.  Carroll and Lowry finished last year at the ripe old age of 28 and are by far the oldest players in that core.  Jonas was just 22.  Patterson and Derozan 25.  Ross 23.  Biyombo and Joseph 22/23.  Toronto is only going to get better.  In fact I'd peg them at 53 wins or so, well ahead of Boston who will be fighting for the playoffs while Toronto is fighting for home court for a round or two.

Like I said, you are assuming everything will go positive for Toronto in terms of improvement, but assuming Boston will not improve at all. You may be expecting it for some reason, but do you not see how shocking it would be for a team that went 24-12, which is close to half the season, to be fighting for the playoffs in the East? Fighting for the playoffs in the East is mid 30s to high 30s in win total. You are expecting Toronto to stay the same or improve (not even giving them a chance of sliding back at all) after losing their best defensive front court player and screen setter, but assuming Boston almost has no chance of improving on their overall record which is already an inaccurate representation of the roster considering all of the trades and player movement. Do you really not see how you are not objectively evaluating both teams here? You are essentially predicting best case scenario for one team and worst case scenario for the other team.

Hearing how young Toronto's roster is and how they can improve because of that youth is just so fun. Why is it that Boston, one of the three youngest rosters in the league, has somehow hit their ceiling? Why is it so hard for you to see this team improving on 40 wins considering the youth and roster turnover experienced in season? Why is it so easy for you to see Toronto improving based on their youth if you can't see the same for Boston? Is it just more of underrating Boston and grass is greener on the other side mentality? I somehow doubt you would even be listing Biyombo as a positive if he signed in Boston. He's considered a joke to most people in terms of BBIQ.

You do know that Toronto went on a very similar run in 2013-2014 as Boston just did after trading Rudy Gay correct? After trading Gay, they won at a 66% win clip (58 games) to end the season, which brought them to 48 wins. That was a pretty big surprise considering they were pretty bad pre-Gay the season previous (12-13). The very next season (14-15) they made little to no major changes and dropped off of their 66% win percentage (minus Gay) but fell to a reasonable 49-50 win pace. The Celtics also finished their season at a 66% win clip (36 games). The biggest difference between the Celtics and Toronto of two years ago is that they cut ties with their bad piece earlier than we did and had the pieces to replace him right away. We had to wait a couple months to trade for our's (IT). I'm not saying the Celtics will definitely gel and blow the league away, but I don't feel you are being consistent with your evaluation of both teams, and you are ignoring potential internal development in Boston while completely buying into the idea of potential internal development in Toronto.

[slamtheking]

The better question is whether there is any reason to thing we can repeat the quite improbable trip to the playoffs from last year.

TP for raising the better question

[slamtheking]

because the 6 teams that finished with better records than the C's last year will do so again as will Miami.  C's will be fighting Indy for the 8th slot.

C's didn't address their 2 biggest needs in a defending/rebounding center or a SF that can score with minimal help being set up. 

the 2 biggest acquisitions by the C's are 2 PFs, which the C's already had plenty of.  sure, they have more overall talent this year but the team still has the same overall issues as last year

Amir is going to have huge impact on the interior's defense as long as he stays relatively healthy. The Celtics didn't need a defensive center as much as they needed a frontcourt player that could play defense worth a lick, which is who Amir is. I'd say they did address a pretty major hole, though, it is obviously a short term fix until we can get a cornerstone piece in the frontcourt.

With the Amir acquisition and a hopefully improving Smart and Crowder, the Celtics need to be setting themselves a goal of being a top 5-7 defense. That's the type of improvement they need to see if they want to launch themselves into the top 4-5 Eastern teams, and I'd say it's pretty reasonable to believe it could happen.

I see no reason to have such confidence in teams like Washington, Toronto, and Milwaukee either. They are mid 40 win teams that shouldn't be garnering so much respect, imo. I don't see it as automatic that all 6 teams in front of the Celtics will still be in front of the Celtics. It'd be pretty boring if you could make predictions like that every single season. 

I like the acquisition of Amir and do think he'll be a help and not just because he's been a binky of mine for a couple of years.  I think it's more unrealistic to expect the C's to continue on the pace they won at at the end of the season than to expect better teams to suddenly perform much worse this coming season.

if Danny had made a real shake-up of the roster during the offseason, my prediction would be different.  the fact there wasn't much turnover would lend support to thinking that the team will be about as good this season as it was at the end of last year from a talent perspective --> a solid roster of NBA bench players.

[DarkAzcura]

because the 6 teams that finished with better records than the C's last year will do so again as will Miami.  C's will be fighting Indy for the 8th slot.

C's didn't address their 2 biggest needs in a defending/rebounding center or a SF that can score with minimal help being set up. 

the 2 biggest acquisitions by the C's are 2 PFs, which the C's already had plenty of.  sure, they have more overall talent this year but the team still has the same overall issues as last year

Amir is going to have huge impact on the interior's defense as long as he stays relatively healthy. The Celtics didn't need a defensive center as much as they needed a frontcourt player that could play defense worth a lick, which is who Amir is. I'd say they did address a pretty major hole, though, it is obviously a short term fix until we can get a cornerstone piece in the frontcourt.

With the Amir acquisition and a hopefully improving Smart and Crowder, the Celtics need to be setting themselves a goal of being a top 5-7 defense. That's the type of improvement they need to see if they want to launch themselves into the top 4-5 Eastern teams, and I'd say it's pretty reasonable to believe it could happen.

I see no reason to have such confidence in teams like Washington, Toronto, and Milwaukee either. They are mid 40 win teams that shouldn't be garnering so much respect, imo. I don't see it as automatic that all 6 teams in front of the Celtics will still be in front of the Celtics. It'd be pretty boring if you could make predictions like that every single season. 

I like the acquisition of Amir and do think he'll be a help and not just because he's been a binky of mine for a couple of years.  I think it's more unrealistic to expect the C's to continue on the pace they won at at the end of the season than to expect better teams to suddenly perform much worse this coming season.

if Danny had made a real shake-up of the roster during the offseason, my prediction would be different.  the fact there wasn't much turnover would lend support to thinking that the team will be about as good this season as it was at the end of last year from a talent perspective --> a solid roster of NBA bench players.

But I think a mistake some make is that when they say the team will perform about the same in the upcoming season, it feels like they are ignoring that the roster was vastly different throughout the season. The Celtics weren't really a 40 win team last year. Not saying you believe that, but if someone truly viewed the Celtics as simply a 40 win team, it'd be a pretty disingenuous statement, imo.

We don't really know what they are to be honest. We know how they performed over 36 games. The question is what can they sustain over 82? If in 36 games, they could play at a 66% rate, or 55 win pace, then I'd say it's pretty doubtful for them to drop to a 37-40 win pace, no? Likewise I think it is just as unrealistic for them to maintain a 55 win pace over 82 games. I think it's more reasonable to expect something in the middle. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

So when someone says, they will perform about the same next year, what does that even mean? There were two different teams last year. One headed by Rondo and Green and another headed by IT and Smart. Just sooooo different in every respect.

Also I personally think there are more starter quality players on this team than given credit for. Amir started on a 49 win team last year. IT is certainly a starting level player and imo, borderline all star. Bradley started on a ECF team a few years back and has made an all defensive team. Sullinger began starting on a low seeded playoff team as a rookie before burning his back out. Smart's defense was elite (not just for a rookie) over the last 40 games and certainly projects to be a starting level player. We don't have a bunch of all stars, but we have starting quality players. I feel like some don't know how bad a lot of NBA benches are if they think this roster is simply made up of 15 bench players.

[Moranis]

Toronto, with basically the same core, has won 48 and 49 games the last two years.  It is far from fool hardy or illogical to put Toronto right back in that range again.  What is illogical is somehow believing Boston is going to make that jump and get in that range with the changes made in the offseason.  And the thing with Toronto, they are also incredibly young.  Carroll and Lowry finished last year at the ripe old age of 28 and are by far the oldest players in that core.  Jonas was just 22.  Patterson and Derozan 25.  Ross 23.  Biyombo and Joseph 22/23.  Toronto is only going to get better.  In fact I'd peg them at 53 wins or so, well ahead of Boston who will be fighting for the playoffs while Toronto is fighting for home court for a round or two.

Like I said, you are assuming everything will go positive for Toronto in terms of improvement, but assuming Boston will not improve at all. You may be expecting it for some reason, but do you not see how shocking it would be for a team that went 24-12, which is close to half the season, to be fighting for the playoffs in the East? Fighting for the playoffs in the East is mid 30s to high 30s in win total. You are expecting Toronto to stay the same or improve (not even giving them a chance of sliding back at all) after losing their best defensive front court player and screen setter, but assuming Boston almost has no chance of improving on their overall record which is already an inaccurate representation of the roster considering all of the trades and player movement. Do you really not see how you are not objectively evaluating both teams here? You are essentially predicting best case scenario for one team and worst case scenario for the other team.

Hearing how young Toronto's roster is and how they can improve because of that youth is just so fun. Why is it that Boston, one of the three youngest rosters in the league, has somehow hit their ceiling? Why is it so hard for you to see this team improving on 40 wins considering the youth and roster turnover experienced in season? Why is it so easy for you to see Toronto improving based on their youth if you can't see the same for Boston? Is it just more of underrating Boston and grass is greener on the other side mentality? I somehow doubt you would even be listing Biyombo as a positive if he signed in Boston. He's considered a joke to most people in terms of BBIQ.

You do know that Toronto went on a very similar run in 2013-2014 as Boston just did after trading Rudy Gay correct? After trading Gay, they won at a 66% win clip (58 games) to end the season, which brought them to 48 wins. That was a pretty big surprise considering they were pretty bad pre-Gay the season previous (12-13). The very next season (14-15) they made little to no major changes and dropped off of their 66% win percentage (minus Gay) but fell to a reasonable 49-50 win pace. The Celtics also finished their season at a 66% win clip (36 games). The biggest difference between the Celtics and Toronto of two years ago is that they cut ties with their bad piece earlier than we did and had the pieces to replace him right away. We had to wait a couple months to trade for our's (IT). I'm not saying the Celtics will definitely gel and blow the league away, but I don't feel you are being consistent with your evaluation of both teams, and you are ignoring potential internal development in Boston while completely buying into the idea of potential internal development in Toronto.

No the biggest difference between Toronto and Boston, is Toronto has some all star level talent (you know seeing as how they have players that have made the all star game that you know are still in their primes).  And that doesn't count their young emerging center.

[fairweatherfan]

The biggest reason to be down on Toronto this year is the rumblings that they're dissatisfied with their playoff performances and trying to blow up/reform their core.  If they go that route it wouldn't be surprising to see them take a step back.  If not, then I agree they're very likely to be better than us.

[clover]

Not if we start last night's lineup of IT, JC, JJ, AJ, and KO!

[DarkAzcura]

Toronto, with basically the same core, has won 48 and 49 games the last two years.  It is far from fool hardy or illogical to put Toronto right back in that range again.  What is illogical is somehow believing Boston is going to make that jump and get in that range with the changes made in the offseason.  And the thing with Toronto, they are also incredibly young.  Carroll and Lowry finished last year at the ripe old age of 28 and are by far the oldest players in that core.  Jonas was just 22.  Patterson and Derozan 25.  Ross 23.  Biyombo and Joseph 22/23.  Toronto is only going to get better.  In fact I'd peg them at 53 wins or so, well ahead of Boston who will be fighting for the playoffs while Toronto is fighting for home court for a round or two.

Like I said, you are assuming everything will go positive for Toronto in terms of improvement, but assuming Boston will not improve at all. You may be expecting it for some reason, but do you not see how shocking it would be for a team that went 24-12, which is close to half the season, to be fighting for the playoffs in the East? Fighting for the playoffs in the East is mid 30s to high 30s in win total. You are expecting Toronto to stay the same or improve (not even giving them a chance of sliding back at all) after losing their best defensive front court player and screen setter, but assuming Boston almost has no chance of improving on their overall record which is already an inaccurate representation of the roster considering all of the trades and player movement. Do you really not see how you are not objectively evaluating both teams here? You are essentially predicting best case scenario for one team and worst case scenario for the other team.

Hearing how young Toronto's roster is and how they can improve because of that youth is just so fun. Why is it that Boston, one of the three youngest rosters in the league, has somehow hit their ceiling? Why is it so hard for you to see this team improving on 40 wins considering the youth and roster turnover experienced in season? Why is it so easy for you to see Toronto improving based on their youth if you can't see the same for Boston? Is it just more of underrating Boston and grass is greener on the other side mentality? I somehow doubt you would even be listing Biyombo as a positive if he signed in Boston. He's considered a joke to most people in terms of BBIQ.

You do know that Toronto went on a very similar run in 2013-2014 as Boston just did after trading Rudy Gay correct? After trading Gay, they won at a 66% win clip (58 games) to end the season, which brought them to 48 wins. That was a pretty big surprise considering they were pretty bad pre-Gay the season previous (12-13). The very next season (14-15) they made little to no major changes and dropped off of their 66% win percentage (minus Gay) but fell to a reasonable 49-50 win pace. The Celtics also finished their season at a 66% win clip (36 games). The biggest difference between the Celtics and Toronto of two years ago is that they cut ties with their bad piece earlier than we did and had the pieces to replace him right away. We had to wait a couple months to trade for our's (IT). I'm not saying the Celtics will definitely gel and blow the league away, but I don't feel you are being consistent with your evaluation of both teams, and you are ignoring potential internal development in Boston while completely buying into the idea of potential internal development in Toronto.

No the biggest difference between Toronto and Boston, is Toronto has some all star level talent (you know seeing as how they have players that have made the all star game that you know are still in their primes).  And that doesn't count their young emerging center.

Toronto had one all star in 2013-2014, and it was Demar Derozan who is arguably (actually definitely) worse than Isaiah Thomas. Making an all star team or having a low level reserve all star isn't making your discussion point any stronger. The fact that Toronto was considered a team with low potential and then unexpectadly blew up after trading Rudy Gay when everyone thought they should tank is actually proving my point more than you think.

The basis of my point is that you are giving a benefit of the doubt to Toronto when I doubt you would be speaking so highly of them in 2013-2014 when Kyle Lowry was nothing but a middling first rounder who couldn't break through in the league, and Demar Derozan was considered a low BBIQ chucker. No one, I mean NO one thought they would win 48 games in 2013-2014 so let's stop pretending they had some awesome young talent this whole time that was just bound to be a 50 win team.  You are looking at them with some serious revisionist history.

The 14-15 Celtics were in a very similar position as Toronto's 13-14 team, and if we had traded for IT a month or two earlier, he would have likely made the all star team as well. Making the all star team has always been a chicken before the egg or egg before the chicken argument. You always get one or two if your team plays well enough, and the Celtics 24-12 run would have warranted an all star selection most likely had the trade occurred earlier. Toronto isn't getting all stars (especially 13-14) because they have some overwhelming collection of talent that far overreaches the Celtics' potential. The Celtics also have emerging talent, but for whatever reason you like to ignore it almost all of the time.

Toronto isn't some special team that should be 'guaranteed' to be better than most Eastern teams. This isn't Lebron and the Cavs here.

[Moranis]

I don't ignore Boston's young players, but Boston is not a team constructed for long term success as it has no go to offensive player, no great take it to the hole players, lacks a reliable post game, has no rim protector, and has a fair amount of inefficient undersized chuckers on the wings.  Nothing Boston did in the offseason resolved the team's deficiencies, though Amir is at least a solid interior defender (though not a rim protector) and Lee may still have a bit left for the offensive post game.

Toronto is just a better constructed team with more established and better players.  Lowry is significantly better than Smart and Thomas (now if you combined Smart and Thomas, you would get Lowry).  DeRozan is a much better all around offensive player than Bradley (though obviously Bradley is a better defender).  Carroll is a significantly better version of Crowder, better defender, better/more consistent outside shooter, better ball handler.  Patterson is pretty much Sullinger (worse rebounder but better shooter).  Valanciunas is everything we want Zeller to be, but never will be.  Amir and Lee are certainly better than Biyombo and Scola.  Turner is a better all around offensive player than Joseph and Ross, but isn't as good a defender or outside shooter. 

Starters big edge to Toronto.  Rotation/Bench each team has flaws and I'd call them about the same.  Toronto will win the Atlantic again and it won't be close.  That said, neither team is a real contender as neither has elite championship talent on the level of the real contenders, like the Cavs, Warriors, Spurs, Thunder, etc. 

[DarkAzcura]

I don't ignore Boston's young players, but Boston is not a team constructed for long term success as it has no go to offensive player, no great take it to the hole players, lacks a reliable post game, has no rim protector, and has a fair amount of inefficient undersized chuckers on the wings.  Nothing Boston did in the offseason resolved the team's deficiencies, though Amir is at least a solid interior defender (though not a rim protector) and Lee may still have a bit left for the offensive post game.

Toronto is just a better constructed team with more established and better players.  Lowry is significantly better than Smart and Thomas (now if you combined Smart and Thomas, you would get Lowry).  DeRozan is a much better all around offensive player than Bradley (though obviously Bradley is a better defender).  Carroll is a significantly better version of Crowder, better defender, better/more consistent outside shooter, better ball handler.  Patterson is pretty much Sullinger (worse rebounder but better shooter).  Valanciunas is everything we want Zeller to be, but never will be.  Amir and Lee are certainly better than Biyombo and Scola.  Turner is a better all around offensive player than Joseph and Ross, but isn't as good a defender or outside shooter. 

Starters big edge to Toronto.  Rotation/Bench each team has flaws and I'd call them about the same.  Toronto will win the Atlantic again and it won't be close.  That said, neither team is a real contender as neither has elite championship talent on the level of the real contenders, like the Cavs, Warriors, Spurs, Thunder, etc.

If you think IT is not a go to scorer or a player that can take it to the hole, then Toronto is also lacking those players. How are Lowry and Derozan go to scorers/players who can take it to the hole if IT isn't? IT is a better scorer than any player on Toronto, and he's better at drawing fouls/driving to the rim than Lowry and Derozan. Toronto also lacks a rim protector, especially now that they lost their best interior defender (sorry Biyombo likely isn't changing anything for any team significantly).

It's too simple to say IT + Smart = Lowry. That's not remotely true, imo. Lowry isn't that good of a player. He's a nice player who is a solid/two-way guard, but he's not elite at anything. IT is actually a nearly elite volume scorer based on effiency/rate and other metrics. Smart is an elite defender or at least projects to be one (Smart as a rookie already had a higher DBPM than Lowry has ever had in any single season). Combining Smart and IT would result in something much, much, better than Kyle Lowry.

Boston has inefficient wing players, I totally agree, but so does Toronto, and the difference is our inefficient wing players aren't overshooting like Demar is. Demar isn't that great of an all around player. He's not a good defender, his mid-range shot is "his game," but it is worse than Avery Bradley's, and he can't shoot a 3 worth a lick. The only reason he even approaches mediocrity in efficiency is because he can draw fouls like a madman, which is a valuable quality I admit and something I wish our wings had.

Talent wise the biggest thing Toronto has on Boston is Val/a consistent post scorer. I totally agree with that statement. Unfortunately for them, their coach is too dumb (talk to Toronto fans) to properly utilize that talent so it almost becomes a moot point.

The Celtics also have better defensive talent from top to bottom.

So of your 5 points in your first paragraph only one of them is really true relative to Toronto's roster (post scorer).

Don't get me wrong, I think there is a good chance Toronto continues it's success and remains a 47-50 win team, but it is far from a guarantee. That's all I'm arguing. It's also far from a guarantee that they will be way ahead of Boston. You are overrating their talent.

[BballTim]

Toronto, with basically the same core, has won 48 and 49 games the last two years.  It is far from fool hardy or illogical to put Toronto right back in that range again.  What is illogical is somehow believing Boston is going to make that jump and get in that range with the changes made in the offseason.  And the thing with Toronto, they are also incredibly young.  Carroll and Lowry finished last year at the ripe old age of 28 and are by far the oldest players in that core.  Jonas was just 22.  Patterson and Derozan 25.  Ross 23.  Biyombo and Joseph 22/23.  Toronto is only going to get better.  In fact I'd peg them at 53 wins or so, well ahead of Boston who will be fighting for the playoffs while Toronto is fighting for home court for a round or two.

  I thought their last season was a step back from the way they played for the bulk of the previous season. They might get better, but it's not really a given.