Celtics in 18-19

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
I won't have time to run my over/under projections under mid-September I expect, but I'm inclined to go under on the Spurs fwiw.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
Houston, Philly and Toronto all at 54.5
It's funny that after all the rending of garments and gnashing of teeth, 3 of the 5 best projected teams are in the East, and Boston is pretty clearly a serious title contender if healthy, since we already know how well the Cs match up defensively against GSW.

It's definitely true that the mid to bottom end of the East is going to be really gross basketball, and that does juice the top-end win totals. But the West has a lot more Spurs-type tough regular season teams than it does true contenders. I might take Toronto with peak Kawhi over any non Dubs out West, for example.
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
I like Dallas over 34.5. I also wonder if the Warriors will coast after the all star break and give their stars plenty of rest, so that they come in under 62.5.
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
6,410
I'd take the over on the Bucks. They added an actual coach, and a very good stretch 5 who should be a great fit. I wouldn't be surprised if they had the second or third best record in the East, behind Toronto and either us or Philly.
 

uk_sox_fan

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,273
London, England
These are the most recent over-under numbers from Westgate Las Vegas Superbook.

Atl 23.5
Bos 57.5
Brk 32.5
Cha 35.5
Chi 27.5
Cle 30.5
Dal 34.5
Den 47.5
Det 37.5
GS 62.5
Hou 54.5
Ind 47.5
LAC 35.5
LAL 48.5
Mem 34.5
Mia 41.5
Mil 46.5
Min 44.5
NO 45.5
NY 29.5
OKC 50.5
Orl 31.5
Phi 54.5
Phx 28.5
Prt 41.5
Sac 25.5
SA 43.5
Tor 54.5
Uth 48.5
Wsh 44.5
Loving the fact that Boston has the 2nd highest O/U (57.5 to 62.5 for GSW) and the Kings have the 2nd lowest (25.5 to the Hawks' 23.5)
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,881
Twin Bridges, Mt.
I suspect that the management will trade whomever they have to to hit the under on that one.
Ya' think? I like Marks and Atkinson a lot and so have been reading about the Nets on a regular basis. They both stated that they won't tank this season and think that the best way to attract 2 Max players, nay the only way, will be to show a good team of high level bench players that work their asses off every night and make the playoffs. They appear to think that adding 2 Max players for nothing but money will be more valuable to their long term goal than adding the 6th pick in the 2019 draft. Whether they can add 2 real good in their prime max players versus adding so players Kemba and Butler, is the story left untold. Or would Kemba and Butler be good enough for them? Their culture is team, family, work. They want to show a very good base team this year and then entice said Max FA's to sign up to lead those base players.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
They aren't going to get anywhere near the playoffs. I know the legend of The East Sux0rs!!! but the reality is that Boston, Toronto, Philly, and Milwaukee are all very likely to be 50+ win teams. Cleveland is going to fall by the wayside, of course, but Indiana is only going to get better. The East does not suck, even if it is a little top heavy (whereas the west is bsically a bunch of middle class teams jostling for position behind Houston and Golden State).

So, yes, while the Nets will keep the vets around to help all the rookie contract players learn, they'll be open for business by the time the new year arrives.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
I actually think Atlanta is a decent over. 24 is not a high bar.
It is a high bar for Atlanta. That roster is terrible and I think they'll tank down the stretch to keep a high pick. 20 wins is probably closer to where they end up.

Really? I like Spurs over as a near lock.
I'm under on the Spurs as well. Pop is a magician but he'll struggle to get that team above .500. Not only is Kawhi gone, but so is Danny Green, Tony Parker and Kyle Anderson. Say what you want about the individual talents of those players, but the Spurs have worked because of culture and continuity and most of that went out the door this offseason. They are light on shooting and questionable on defense and there are not a lot of bottom feeders in the west for them to rack up wins on.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Kawhi has been gone for more than a year now. So regardless of what you think of DeRozan, he is better than nothing.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
Q: Which is better, eternal happiness or DeMar DeRozan?
A: DeRozan, because nothing is better than eternal happiness, and DeRozan is better than nothing.

Seriously, I think there are a some big-name players who are actually worse than nothing (*cough*Carmelo*cough*) but I think that definitely does not apply to DeRozan. Plus, Pop has a knack for maximizing players' strengths and minimizing their weaknesses.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Really? I like Spurs over as a near lock.
Chris Sheridan touted Spurs when the number first came out at 40.5 before the money moved it. Says his "correct" number is 50.5. I'm in the high-40's camp and expect Dejounte to take another leap this year. Losing Kawhi and Parker off last years team doesn't touch the needle as they had no impact.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,743
Rotten Apple
Good news, bad news. The Celtics are only the 6th best team in the league, 2nd in the East. The good news is that the Kings are the worst:

 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
We outperformed that by 7 games last year iirc, so this seems about right. 61-21. Assuming that Brad rests everyone a lot, I'm fine with that.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Chris Sheridan touted Spurs when the number first came out at 40.5 before the money moved it. Says his "correct" number is 50.5. I'm in the high-40's camp and expect Dejounte to take another leap this year. Losing Kawhi and Parker off last years team doesn't touch the needle as they had no impact.
Agreed. I think the Spurs number is quite low. They won 47 without Kawhi and now that distraction is gone. Danny Green is a decent player but he's a role player. Ditto for Kyle Anderson. Parker didn't impact much either.

DeRozan is far from perfect but he gives them another top scorer. I see at least 47 wins this year as long as Aldridge doesn't significantly decline, which would be rather unexpected, imo.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,500
If I was in Vegas and I could take the over on the Blazers only winning 39 games I might bet everything I own.
Curious as to why?

Westgate has them at 41.5 games and Pelton has them at 42 so 39 doesn't seem like a huge outlier. They lost a somewhat useful player I'm told in Ed Davis, didn't really improve the team otherwise, and certain teams around them got better.

Maybe they win more than 39 games, but taking the over on the Cs at 53 seems like a much better bet (if I were a betting man).

edit: Pacers over 43 also seems like a much better bet as Chris Sheridan points out.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
15,948
Nashua, NH
Curious as to why?

Westgate has them at 41.5 games and Pelton has them at 42 so 39 doesn't seem like a huge outlier. They lost a somewhat useful player I'm told in Ed Davis, didn't really improve the team otherwise, and certain teams around them got better.

Maybe they win more than 39 games, but taking the over on the Cs at 53 seems like a much better bet (if I were a betting man).

edit: Pacers over 43 also seems like a much better bet as Chris Sheridan points out.
I don't think they're a particularly good team or have any chance of making noise in the West playoffs, but I also don't see how an offense with McCollum, Lillard, and Nurkic goes four games under .500. They were 49-33 last season and have kept the main core together. Yes, a lot of the West teams improved but there are still a lot of bottom feeders out there.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
I don't think they're a particularly good team or have any chance of making noise in the West playoffs, but I also don't see how an offense with McCollum, Lillard, and Nurkic goes four games under .500. They were 49-33 last season and have kept the main core together. Yes, a lot of the West teams improved but there are still a lot of bottom feeders out there.
In the West it's really only Sacramento and Phoenix. The next tier up — Dallas, Memphis, LAC — all have real potential to be decent; and everyone else looks at minimum pretty good. The zero-sum win rule kinda dictates that at least a couple of Western teams are going to underperform what one would expect based on looking the quality of their rosters in a vacuum. No idea if Portland is one of those teams, though...
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
So I took the projected (by Vegas) win totals for all of the EC teams vs the WC teams. The EC teams averaged 39.6 wins and the WC teams averaged 43.7.

Correct me if my logic is wrong, but if you took the under on every WC team and the over on every EC team, you would be a favorite to come out ahead, unless the win totals for just a few teams have been significantly underprojected or overprojected.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Curious as to why?

Westgate has them at 41.5 games and Pelton has them at 42 so 39 doesn't seem like a huge outlier. They lost a somewhat useful player I'm told in Ed Davis, didn't really improve the team otherwise, and certain teams around them got better.

Maybe they win more than 39 games, but taking the over on the Cs at 53 seems like a much better bet (if I were a betting man).

edit: Pacers over 43 also seems like a much better bet as Chris Sheridan points out.
Yeah I'm with you on the Blazers. Their win total was inflated by one extremely hot 13-game win streak. Also, their top 3 players were healthy for nearly the entire season. A lot of things went Portland's way last year on the way to 49 wins and they really didn't do anything to improve this summer.
 

ishmael

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 3, 2006
640
So I took the projected (by Vegas) win totals for all of the EC teams vs the WC teams. The EC teams averaged 39.6 wins and the WC teams averaged 43.7.

Correct me if my logic is wrong, but if you took the under on every WC team and the over on every EC team, you would be a favorite to come out ahead, unless the win totals for just a few teams have been significantly underprojected or overprojected.
Average Eastern Conference team won 40.2 games last year. The average Western Conference team won 41.8 games.

Switch LeBron from Cleveland (50 wins) to LA (35 wins) and you're pretty much at Vegas's numbers...
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Each team plays 52 games against teams in its own conference and 30 games against the other conference. It's a mathematical certainty that as a group, WC teams will average 26 wins against WC teams. For the Vegas numbers to hold, WC teams will have to go 17-13 or better on average against EC teams. That isn't a huge average margin of victory, but I don't think LeBron moving West accounts for all of it.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
So I took the projected (by Vegas) win totals for all of the EC teams vs the WC teams. The EC teams averaged 39.6 wins and the WC teams averaged 43.7.

Correct me if my logic is wrong, but if you took the under on every WC team and the over on every EC team, you would be a favorite to come out ahead, unless the win totals for just a few teams have been significantly underprojected or overprojected.
Your arbitrage edge is less than the vig. You'd make money if you got totally even -100 odds on each bet, but that's not the case in the real world, sadly.

edit: you might be close to +0 EV with a -105 vig, actually. But certainly not that positive, and you're locking up your money for an 8-month window for the sake of what at-best is a very small edge.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
From: https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/2018-19-nba-playoff-projections-lebron-gets-lakers-top-three-seed-in-west-raptors-fend-off-celtics-to-top-east/

EASTERN CONFERENCE VEGAS LINE SPORTSLINE PROJECTION
(1) Toronto Raptors

(2) Boston Celtics

(3) Philadelphia 76ers

(4) Indiana Pacers

(5) Miami Heat

(6) Milwaukee Bucks

(7) Detroit Pistons

(8) Washington Wizards


Their rationale?

"Raptors: On paper, a 59-win team added a top-five player when healthy (Kawhi Leonard), which is why they are still No. 1 in the East.

Celtics: Adding Gordon Hayward helps depth, but doesn't really make a huge impact because it results in fewer minutes/touches for Jayson Tatum."

So I'm with NBA2K19. I think they have the starting lineup nailed. And isn't the added depth a REALLY good thing? Each guy can go harder for shorter amounts of time instead of having to conserve energy. Moreover, when one guy is struggling, there's another uber-talented guy waiting to go in. And on back-to-backs, this is a huge advantage.

With Toronto, yeah they're adding a top 5 guy, but they forgot to mention that they lost a perennial all-star in the process. So yes Kawhi is better than DeRozan, but it's not like they added a top-five player on top of what they already had. They're adding the *difference between Kawhi and DeRozan*. Meanwhile, the Celtics are actually adding Hayward and, frankly, Kyrie (who missed, what, the last two months counting playoffs?).
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,208
On the other hand the difference between Kawhi and Derozan is thought by some to be very very large.
You are spot on...

DeRozan's career BPM average is -0.6 with last season his best at 1.8. Kawhi Leonard's career BPM is 6.3 and excluding last year because of the tiny sample size, his last two full seasons were his best at 8.3 and 7.9 respectively. People can make an argument that Leonard has to prove that he can stay healthy but if DeMar's season last year is representative of what he can do going forward while Kawhi regresses to his career average, the difference is still very, very large.

I am a DeRozan fan but let's be blunt here. He is not a top ten player by virtually all measures. Kawhi, if healthy, is arguably in the top three or four.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,376
I don't disagree with you guys. But they're still not simply adding a top 5 player to their 2017-18 roster. They're adding the difference between a top 5 player and an all-star. Obviously that's far less of an improvement than simply adding a top 5 player all by himself.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
You are spot on...

DeRozan's career BPM average is -0.6 with last season his best at 1.8. Kawhi Leonard's career BPM is 6.3 and excluding last year because of the tiny sample size, his last two full seasons were his best at 8.3 and 7.9 respectively. People can make an argument that Leonard has to prove that he can stay healthy but if DeMar's season last year is representative of what he can do going forward while Kawhi regresses to his career average, the difference is still very, very large.

I am a DeRozan fan but let's be blunt here. He is not a top ten player by virtually all measures. Kawhi, if healthy, is arguably in the top three or four.
All true, but let's not discount the disgruntled aspect. He doesn't want to play for them and will be gone to LA at season's end.
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Toronto won 59 games because their second unit was outstanding. We'll see if that unit plays as well this year with Danny Green in the mix instead of Poeltl.

The argument that Hayward will take minutes away from Tatum is not well- reasoned. Hayward will take minutes away from Morris and Ojeleye, not Tatum. And if Tatum gets fewer touches, it will be due to the return of Kyrie, who is a ball dominant player. It won't have anything to do with Hayward.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Toronto won 59 games because their second unit was outstanding. We'll see if that unit plays as well this year with Danny Green in the mix instead of Poeltl.

The argument that Hayward will take minutes away from Tatum is not well- reasoned. Hayward will take minutes away from Morris and Ojeleye, not Tatum. And if Tatum gets fewer touches, it will be due to the return of Kyrie, who is a ball dominant player. It won't have anything to do with Hayward.
Even if KL is disgruntled (which I know I just mentioned myself, I just think it’s important to take note of) or maybe even if he’s 80%(?) healthy, he is enough of an upgrade from DeRozan to make up for the difference on Green to Poeltl and I’m not even sure there’s a deficit on that swap.

As for Hayward/Tatum, it’s certainly going to change the dynamic. How that plays out - including Kyrie back and Brown involved - is going to be interesting to watch, but also really fun. It’s almost like a Pats WR scenario - the opponent gets to pick their poison and the Celtics get to play to the matchups on any given game. They’re not going to lean on Tatum as much, but it will be made up for elsewhere. And we can all count on more sports radio bs about Horford because he’s going to become even more of a non-box score type contributor most games.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
The Celtics top five will get whatever minutes Brad and staff decide that they can handle. Assuming full health for all, that's likely 30-32 MPG for each of them. There's no contention between finding minutes for Hayward and Tatum. That's utter nonsense. Brad will divvy up the rest of the minutes appropriately, with the other guys getting more or less run for any individual game based on matchups. They know what the fuck they're doing.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,208
Agreed Jimbodandy.

The idea that the Celtics will struggle because Heighword takes away touches from Tatum is silly as Big John notes.

As was pointed out by Sprtsguy33 in the Simmons podcast with Tatum, one of the hallmarks of the Stevens system is that he doesn't just draw up plays for his stars - he runs plays for guys down the roster. The fact that the Celtics will be incredibly deep means that not only does he have many options but also that they are all really good ones. And its safe to say that this team will be able to rest guys for stretches without much of a drop-off (last season sans Heywurd and Kyrie did wonders for guys beyond Brown and Tatum).

That said, I wouldn't be shocked if Toronto is as good or better than they were last season. Nurse should, at worst, be as good as Casey and his familiarity with most of his personnel and the offense gives him a unique leg up over many other first time NBA coaches. And as was mentioned upthread, Leonard at full strength makes the Raptors better.

In any event, these two teams are going to be fun to watch as they jockey to be the top seed in the East with the 76ers, Pacers and Bucks on their heels. The season really cannot start soon enough.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
That said, I wouldn't be shocked if Toronto is as good or better than they were last season. Nurse should, at worst, be as good as Casey and his familiarity with most of his personnel and the offense gives him a unique leg up over many other first time NBA coaches. And as was mentioned upthread, Leonard at full strength makes the Raptors better.

In any event, these two teams are going to be fun to watch as they jockey to be the top seed in the East with the 76ers, Pacers and Bucks on their heels. The season really cannot start soon enough.
I can't wait for the season to start either. The East will be a lot of fun to watch.

Toronto is a huge wildcard to me. I don't disagree with anything that you wrote about them. Nurse could be an upgrade, Kawhi could be old Kawhi (which is an enormous upgrade on DeRozan), etc. However, I think that part of Toronto's fantastic regular season last year was based on the continuity factor. Nurse could have a seamless transition or not. Kawhi could be far less than old Kawhi, either physically or in attitude. The effect of the change could go the other way. I won't be shocked with Toronto winning anything between 45 and 65 games.
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
The team that frightens me is Milwaukee, not Toronto or Philadelphia. The Bucks have added veteran role players to go along with Giannis and Middleton, and they will be very dangerous.

As for Toronto, I just don't see guys like Anunoby and Van Vleet sneaking up on people the way the did last year, and Ibaka isn't getting any younger. And who knows about Kawhi? Even if he's back 100%, the Celtics have guys who can match up with him.

As for Philly, it's last year's team with Muscala and Chandler instead of Belinelli and Ilyasova. Teams will close out on Redick and dare the others to shoot.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
The team that frightens me is Milwaukee, not Toronto or Philadelphia. The Bucks have added veteran role players to go along with Giannis and Middleton, and they will be very dangerous.
Meh. I'm not all that worried about the Bucks given that most of those vets play the same position as Thon Maker and Henson. There's only so many minutes at the C position.

Bledsoe is getting toastier by the day (he's bone on bone in both knees), he's a shell of what he once was defensively, and his shooting just isn't good enough to survive as an offensive roleplayer in the pace & space era.

Maybe Connaughton finally breaks out and becomes a solid 3&D player, but at the end of the day this team is still two forwards (Antetokounmpo & Middleton) trying to carry a team praying the surrounding cast doesn't hold them back too much.

Now, I think that the Greek Freak is a top 5 guy and MVP level player, but his #2 would be the fourth best player on the Celtics. And no one else on that squad would be more than bench depth here. They're the 2015-2018 Cavs without LeBron. Still a good squad, but not a threat to Boston.

I'll agree with you about Philly, they have some real shooting issues that they have yet to address (other than the hope that Hanlan has saved Fultz after he Fultzed up his jumper). I was surprised that they did so little to tackle those backcourt issues.

I'll also agree that Toronto doesn't worry me. Leonard can only guard one player at a time, and Boston has plus offensive options at all five spots on the floor, one of the best alpha scorers in the NBA, and Tatum trending heavily in that direction. But I'm rooting for the Raptors to convince Leonard to stay, it would be hilarious to see Magic fail despite the NBA giving tacit approval to LA's constant tampering with other teams' pending free agents.