Predictions... meet Hindsight! Post your own predictions regarding the Nets!

[positivitize]

One Rule to Rule(?) them all:

This is supposed to be a fun thread, no calling other users out by name specifically. If you are responding to a quote by someone, remove their username/the link to the old quote from the quote. Only re-post YOUR OWN posts.

I thought it might be fun to look back at what we were saying before the season about the (then) upcoming Nets' pick.

Come and serve yourself a piping hot slice of humble pie, or put on your "I-Told-You-So" shorts and strut around!

You can access your own post history by clicking Profile > Show Posts (under your user name). It didn't take more than a few minutes to dig up some of my own gems regarding the Nets pick.

How great/awful were you at predicting the value of the Nets' pick? Time to face the music/Applause.

Have fun with it!

[positivitize]

As for myself, I like to think I called it pretty well, so I'll be putting on my "I-Told-You-So" pants.

The nets will not be as bad as people think for one simple reason.  To be bottom 5 bad, you almost have to try to be bad.  The nets have no motivation to try to be bad.

I don't know where this sentiment comes from. Owners of teams might try to put out a bad product or sabotage their teams by trading away talent for picks and expiring contracts, but no one playing the game, not the coaches, players, or supporting staff actually ever tries to be bad.

Players don't get paid if they play poorly. For the player, it makes 0 financial sense to play poorly on purpose. Sure their performances can suffer if there are problems in the locker room or if they're buried on the depth chart, but those situations happen all the time on teams that are not trying to tank. These guys are uber competitive and have worked their entire lives for the chance to win games in the nba. Players do not tank.

Coaches are also payed by performance and are always trying to win in order to secure their position/ make a play for a better one. The coach's position is admittedly more complicated than the players' position because the coach is in direct contact with management, but no coach is ever trying to lose the game. These people are uber competitive and payed for their ability to win basketball games. Sure, the GM can hire a bad coach or a coach who isn't ready to coach in the nba (as Ainge attempted to do with Stevens), but even bad or unready coaches try to win their games-their livelyhood depends on it.

All this is not to say that "tanking" isn't real or isn't a concern. It is. The GM can control a lot of variables to help his/her team lose games. However, every one of those variables can also occur naturally. And a lot of those variables have naturally manifested on the current Nets team. Lack of depth? Check. A roster of players that lack the required quickness to play defense combined with a defense first minded coach? Check. Demotivated players due to consistent losing and everyone out for themselves to re-establish their value? Probably. Locker room problems? None yet after trading Williams, but who knows? They haven't played a game together yet. Injury prone big men? Check Check.

Whether it is intentional or not, the Brooklynn Nets are tanking this year. Thanks Billy King!

... But I also have to eat some humble pie for only expecting the pick to land 4-8. I was too afraid to hope. I also was totally wrong about Lopez--he was an animal most nights and was nothing comparable to Greg Monroe:

Brooke Lopez is Greg Monroe with more injury problems and worse defense.
Thad Young is an older Tobias Harris without the star potential.
Andrea Bargnani is a older, slower Kelley Olynyk without the playmaking.
Joe Johnson is a rapidly aging former All-Star who hasn't been good for a few seasons.
Jarrett Jack is a solid backup point guard / poor man's Isaiah Thomas.

Replace their bench with our summer league team(minus Smart) and there wouldn't be much of a negative impact.

These are the guys that are going to make the playoffs in a east that's improved from last year?
I don't buy it.

Let's go ahead and say that Lionel Hollins works magic on the offensive end and all these offence first, ball dominant players magically mesh perfectly. The Nets score 110-115 a night with a back up point guard running the show. Who on their team is going to lift their hands or move their feet and stop every other team from scoring 120? In a best case scenario, the Nets have a proficient team on one half of the ball. Even in the lEastern conference, that will not get you into the playoffs.

Personally, I doubt the ability of a group of aging ball dominant has-beens to gel cohesively, even in an environment as historically stellar as the Nets', and even under the coaching mastermind Hollins.

I predict our pick falling into the 4-8 range. Even better if injuries happen to older players.

[mef730]

Couldn't find my own posts, but I had the Nets winning 25-30 games. Missed there. Also had the pick at 4-8. Currently guiding to the low end of the range.

Mike

[Evantime34]

I can't find where I posted my opinion before the season so if someone finds it please post it here.

If I remember correctly I did predict a bottom 5 finish. I also cited their lack of depth as a reason that their season would go off the rails if injuries occurred.

However, I thought the injuries would be to Lopez or Young and I didn't come close to predicting how poorly they would begin their season.

[positivitize]

I can't find where I posted my opinion before the season so if someone finds it please post it here.

If I remember correctly I did predict a bottom 5 finish. I also cited their lack of depth as a reason that their season would go off the rails if injuries occurred.

However, I thought the injuries would be to Lopez or Young and I didn't come close to predicting how poorly they would begin their season.

Yeah, I'm with you on the Lopez/Young injurys. I didn't think that Lopez or Young would be near as good as they were, and I thought Lopez/Young being this good would matter way more than it did. I still cant believe that Lopez had such an amazing season, and yet the Nets STILL did so poorly.

TP!

[slamtheking]

Don't know where my old posts are but said they'd be a bottom 5 team last summer and happy to say that I was spot on.  one thing I was incorrect about was that I expected Lopez to miss some games but he's been pretty healthy this season -- still didn't help them from sucking more than a black hole

[indeedproceed]

I thought they'd be better. I argued it pretty passionately. If anyone deserves a 'Toader So', it's me.

[saltlover]

I made a decent prediction, although Brookyln exceeded my cautious expectations (I thought they'd need a Lopez injury to get to this level.)

Anyway, I think that even a fully healthy Nets team misses the playoffs and provides the Celtics with no worse than the 11th pick, and it wouldn't surprise me if they were healthy and gave us the 8th pick.  Lopez getting hurt for any extended length of time makes the bottom completely drop out of this team.  Just about everything went right for the Nets last year and they squeaked out 37 wins and won the tiebreaker with the Pacers, which gave them (Atlanta really) the 15th pick instead of the 11th pick.  They're replacing Deron Williams with Shane Larkin.  Plumlee, overrated tho he is, with Bargnani.  Alan Anderson was downright mediocre, but he's still a better player this year than RHJ.  A full season of Thaddeus Young, who's been the best player on consecutive teams that failed to win 20 games, doesn't move the needle.  Brookyln is a 30-win team when healthy.  The Celtics will get somewhere between a very good pick and a great pick.

[positivitize]

I thought they'd be better. I argued it pretty passionately. If anyone deserves a 'Toader So', it's me.

TP for being a bigger man and admitting it!

[sofutomygaha]

There is a treasure trove of predictions in this thread: http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=80547.msg1951811#msg1951811

For my own part, I dodged the direct question but I did say this:

On the up-and-coming Hornets, Bucks, Magic, and Pistons

. Shiny young shooting stars fall to earth all the time. These teams all have significant downside. At least one of them is going to invest a lot of minutes in a young, talented lineup that just never makes the jump. I can't say who it is (Orlando... it's still Orlando), but someone is staying in basement.

Not too shabby, but not like I called it on the Bucks.

On the improvement of 2nd tier eastern teams

It's not at all obvious to me that Indiana and Detroit have improved significantly. The Pacers have a great 1-2 punch with George and Ellis, but they are going to be really terrible up front. Detroit let a max player walk and brought in Ilyasova, Meeks, and Marcus Morris--- all interesting players, but none will ever be an all-star. They are still building around Drummond, a fantastic rebounder and physical specimen who regressed on both sides of the ball last season.

I'm off base for sure. They are still in the middle of the pack, but both improved tremendously and the Pacers were way better down low than I thought.

On the middle of the pack in the east

The Wizards look to me like they're going to slide. Wall is great, and Beal+Porter are nice players, but that team was precarious already with an aging, up-and-down frontcourt. Pierce was good for them last year, whereas his replacement Jared Dudley is an average player. Nene is falling apart and Gortat is a big candidate to regress. If Wall were to get hurt, by the way, the Wizards would fold even harder than the Heat did without Bosh and the Pacers did without George.

Spot on, but plenty of us thought so.

On Jared Sullinger’s season averages

I am very confident that Sullinger is about to have a career year, but his career has been short and unspectacular... average something like 16 points, 7 rebounds, 45% FG

The numbers I predicted were lousy. Sullinger has averaged 10.4, 8.4, 44%. Whether he has had a career year is debatable, but I would say it has been his best so far. He has played the best defense of his career, and he has improved his efficiency a ton by shooting less, passing more, and rebounding like he did when he was a rookie.

On the stupid, stupid #ESPNForecast

I predict that every single team in the NBA will finish 41-41. I also predict that my prediction will come in within 5 games of the accuracy of #ESPNForecast.

This was a slam dunk, of course. ESPNForecast missed the mark by an average 6.73 games and a median of 6.9 games. My prediction missed by an average of 8.53 games and a median of 6.8 games. That means that my model beat ESPNforecast more often than not, but it lost very badly on a few occasions. Those occasions were Cleveland and Philadelphia, for whom 41-41 was clearly a ridiculous prediction. If you throw those out, my dumbass prediction wins both more often and with better margin.

[positivitize]

This was a slam dunk, of course. ESPNForecast missed the mark by an average 6.73 games and a median of 6.9 games. My prediction missed by an average of 8.53 games and a median of 6.8 games. That means that my model beat ESPNforecast more often than not, but it lost very badly on a few occasions. Those occasions were Cleveland and Philadelphia, for whom 41-41 was clearly a ridiculous prediction. If you throw those out, my dumbass prediction wins both more often and with better margin.

Cant argue with the numbers! Bold predictions, man!

[mmmmm]

Argh ... not sure I can find a post.  It might have been on the front page.  I think I was conservative and probably called out somewhere in the 5-10 range, though I was probably expecting a Lopez injury to be needed to get to the '5' end of that.  They have, of course, "exceeded my expectations" by not only being much worse than that, but by doing so without actually losing Lopez for a big chunk of the season!

On the other hand, I definitely called out 48 wins for the C's.  Let's hope we can get that next one and make me right!

Beat Miami!!!

[nickagneta]

Let's say the Nets after 20 games are 4-16. That's a winning percentage of .200. Let's also say that realistically the Nets have to get to .500 just to get into the playoffs. That means they woul have to go 37-25 the rest of the way playing at a .597 rate.

I think expecting that team to turn things around and play at that rate for the final 62 games is beyond realistic. I also don't think the Nets will continue at a .200 rate the rest of the year unless they blow it up. But if they improve and let's say play poorly but not epically bad, like at a .350 clip that would mean winning 21 more games and ending up 25-57. That's a bad record.

Over the last 10 years 25wins has netted:
7th worst record
7th worst record
3rd worst record
7th worst record
3rd worst record
7th worst record
10th worst record
4th worst record
4th worst record
5th worst record

So realistically,  I see a 5th or 6th worst record when all is said and done. If there are injuries or trades, I see this maybe getting even lower.

We will see

This was my earliest prediction on the Nets wins and it occurred when the Nets were 2-11. I was off by 3-4 games and a couple of places in the lottery slotting.

I have said all along that the three Nets picks from 2016-2018 would be lottery picks, all of them.

Now I am thinking all three might be very high lottery picks, like top 5

[TheSundanceKid]

If the last few years have proven anything, it's that it is really, really hard to be one of the 5 worst teams in the league - even if you wouldn't mind being awful.

Brooklyn will actively try not to be awful, barring a major (and incredibly stupid) shift in franchise strategy.

I just don't see it happening.

The previous 4 years for the 5th worst record:

2015: Orlando 25-57
2014: Celtics 25-57
2013: Pelicans 27-55
2012: Kings 22-44

I wouldn't have considered Orlando a tanking team. I would say we didn't try to tank but ended up overachieving that year. I can't recall the Pelicans and Kings in the years before. I think the 5th worst record is the ceiling for the Brooklyn pick. If they have a particularly good season they could have the 12th worst record (The average over the last 4 years is 35 wins). So I think the range is 5-12 pre lottery night.

I agree with you that it would be implausible for them to finish with the 1st-4th worst records. The chances of getting a pick there depends on lady luck!

I thought 5 was their ceiling but more likely around 8-10. They've been much worse than I thought! With one game to go they are 4 wins worse off than I thought they would be in their worst scenario which is pretty nice!

[TheSundanceKid]

Don't know where my old posts are but said they'd be a bottom 5 team last summer and happy to say that I was spot on.  one thing I was incorrect about was that I expected Lopez to miss some games but he's been pretty healthy this season -- still didn't help them from sucking more than a black hole

I can vouch for that. You replied to my prediction saying you thought they'd be one of those teams that underperforms. You have been proven to be spot on!