ESPN 25 Win Season Projection

[John Galt]

nobody allows for the possibility that there was a little sandbagging last year (cuffs on). maybe the whole 'vet' thing was part of a covert tank.

I'm gonna say a bright young coach has the most athletic Kings team ever and they will defy projections - what they do next year can't be extrapolated from what they did last year. Different ball game. Cuffs are off.

We'll see. I'm excited to see.

 

[Joshoua]

I think Kings may surprise many and approach 32-35....and if they got closer to 37-38 I won’t be shocked as that most likely means Fox has elevated his game, Giles and Bagley and WCS defensively are really good, Hield continues to elevate game, Bogie elevates his game and JJ can knock down 3’s at a rate closer to 40% than 30%. Ferrell is a big upgrade over Hill and Mason from last year. Bjelica plays at a solid level.

The key is going to be Fox though, he’s the one that can take this team farther.

If we get to 37-38 wins it means Fox is an mvp type player not an all star in the future, Buddy is getting 20ppg, Bogdan is at 16-5-5, and Giles is in the running for rookie of the year.

I think we’ll be at 27-34 wins asking for any more is too much in the West

 

[Kingster]

It’s not just pace it’s also shooters. The Kings can’t be 3rd in 3 pt. Shooting percentage and 28th in attempts. To me pace and 3 pt attempts are on Fox.

To me it starts with Joerger. He's got to demand the pace, and he's got to give the green light to Buddy, Hield, Bjelica, JJ, and maybe Giles to hoist open threes when they get them. Then he's got to demand that players get the ball to open 3 point shooters. Fox is a key because he's the point of the very fast spear, but it's not all on him by any means. If an outlet passer doesn't see an open Fox, he better get it quickly to some other player who is open. Also, when Fox goes out of the game, Yogi & Co. need to keep up the pace too. I keep harping on this one point, but I'm going to harp on it some more: emphasis needs to be put on quick outlet passes. Recently, I watched a couple of the old Lakers-Boston playoff series, and what you see is a Lakers' defensive rebound, and bam! the outlet pass is made immediately. None of this BS that we saw many times last year with the Kings where after getting a defensive rebound they hesitated and waffled, apparently not knowing what to do, who to throw it to, not having a plan of action. If the Kings can't even begin a fast break correctly, they can just throw the whole season in the toilet as far as I am concerned.

 

[Cojc]

I always hope that they have a break out year and sign up for the nba channel.
After about 20 games I am usually so frustrated that I do not watch for awhile.
Then I start watching all the games again to see how the new guys work out the rest of the season.

 

[gunks]

Ehhhhh.... I think we'll do a little better than 25 wins, but I don't think it'll be by much.

 

[Npliam]

It is going to be a struggle for the Kings this year to win games. Young teams just don't win in the NBA especially without a transedant super star. Playing in the brutally tough west won't help. You face a playoff caliber team almost every night.

There can still be proggress with the young players but I would be really surpised if the Kings win 30 games. You are going to have nights where it all comes together and you beat someone that you shouldn't. the young players will show improvment and that should give the fan base hope.

 

[Warhawk]

I'm thinking around 30. They do that (win 30+) and the team plays well, showing development, and keeping things close in just about every game is the best we could hope for next year.

 

[63royals]

Do I hope the Kings do a whole lot better than 25 wins? Absolutely.

Do I have any facts or analysis to back that up? None whatsoever.

One of the great things about this site is that there are a lot of people who do great detailed analysis, so I can read it here instead of having to do it myself. Being a math-oriented guy, I drink it all up (well, most of it at least). My perspective is just a little different.

The Rochester Royals won this fanchise's only championship in the spring of 1951, and I was born 6 months later. That means I'm now 66 (soon to be 67) and it hasn't happened in my lifetime. When you're a small market franchise, everything has to be perfect to win a championship, and we should have won it in 2002. Instead we got (not-an-obscenity-on-a-family-board)ed in favor of the (not-an-obscenity-on-a-family-board) LA Fakers.

So what I HOPE for is significant progress. I think there is the potential for it to be something amazing. We'll see. I'll leave it to others to demonstrate how delusional I am.

 

[One and Done]

Thinking 25 is on point, barring injury/lack of development from youngsters.

More likely in my mind is Joerger getting the axe (taking the fall for this roster/super team) as the losses pile up.

 

[Iced Espresso]

ESPN prediction 2017-2018 27.4
We won 27
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...otals-standings-every-nba-team-2017-18-season

ESPN prediction 2016-2017 32
We won 32
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/17886875/nba-projected-fall-forecast-standings-2016-17

ESPN prediction 2015-2016 34
We won 33
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/13980821/projected-standings-2015-16

I'm going to guess 24 wins myself.

 

[Iced Espresso]

A few observations.

Dallas added Jordan, they should press harder than they did last season. No pick to worry about
Lakers obviously should win more games.
PHX Booker has been tired of losing, they just got Ayton and Ariza
Memphis was hurt & tanking

The only team that I can see possibly throw the towel in early is the Clippers, that's only post trade deadline most likely if they can't compete.

 

[Larry David]

ESPN prediction 2017-2018 27.4
We won 27
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...otals-standings-every-nba-team-2017-18-season

ESPN prediction 2016-2017 32
We won 32
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/17886875/nba-projected-fall-forecast-standings-2016-17

ESPN prediction 2015-2016 34
We won 33
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/13980821/projected-standings-2015-16

I'm going to guess 24 wins myself.

I respectfully request that you recheck these numbers. I don't they are right The national media are mostly haters with only superficial knowledge regarding the team. The projected win totals of the local media and fans here tend to be correct.

 

[Iced Espresso]

I respectfully request that you recheck these numbers. I don't they are right The national media are mostly haters with only superficial knowledge regarding the team. The projected win totals of the local media and fans here tend to be correct.

I do think things like dysfunctional locker room, not understanding some of the Gerbil + Mullin issues, and especially Maloofy shenanigans were not properly covered or lazy in analysis.

But hey the Kings exceed my expectations last year, pegged them at 17 wins.

I'll be happy if 2 of our young guys make big leaps, and Bagley doesn't look like a bust. But my expectations are low.

 

[Sac.1989]

We're going to ball this season 41 wins minimum

 

[burekijogurt]

We're going to ball this season 41 wins minimum

you took my number. im gonna go with 39

 

[twslam07]

In the 22 years NBA.com has been tracking Net Rating, there has not been one team that has had a net rating of -7.9 or lower (SAC 's netrtg was -7.9 this last year) and finished with a higher win total. Let that sink in.

The Kings record last year was not representative of their talent. Expecting an increase from 27 is setting yourselves up for disappointment.

When using the last 22 years of data (omitting the 2 years that had shorten seasons) shows the Kings should have been around 21.7 wins last year with a net rating of -7.9. I don't see any issue with ESPN's projection. 25 wins equates to us taking our net rating from -7.9 to -6.5.

Below is the graph of net rating by wins over the last 22 years with a linear fit added in (orange line) and R^2 called out (red text). It shows that a -7.9 net rtg should result in 21.7 wins (green dot).

The media sometimes doesn't give us a fair shake but this is certainly not one of those times.

 

[burekijogurt]

In the 22 years NBA.com has been tracking Net Rating, there has not been one team that has had a net rating of -7.9 or lower (SAC 's netrtg was -7.9 this last year) and finished with a higher win total. Let that sink in.

The Kings record last year was not representative of their talent. Expecting an increase from 27 is setting yourselves up for disappointment.

When using the last 22 years of data (omitting the 2 years that had shorten seasons) shows the Kings should have been around 21.7 wins last year with a net rating of -7.9. I don't see any issue with ESPN's projection. 25 wins equates to us taking our net rating from -7.9 to -6.5.

Below is the graph of net rating by wins over the last 22 years with a linear fit added in (orange line) and R^2 called out (red text). It shows that a -7.9 net rtg should result in 21.7 wins (green dot).

The media sometimes doesn't give us a fair shake but this is certainly not one of those times.

View attachment 8299

I agree that the data coupled with reasonable assumptions shows that our win total will be around what ESPN predicted. However, I think those reasonable assumptions will not hold. the most likely thing will not happen. we will be an outlier in the amount of improvement we show. we will crush it next year and I need to place my bets accordingly..

 

[Turgenev]

ESPN prediction 2017-2018 27.4
We won 27
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...otals-standings-every-nba-team-2017-18-season

ESPN prediction 2016-2017 32
We won 32
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/17886875/nba-projected-fall-forecast-standings-2016-17

ESPN prediction 2015-2016 34
We won 33
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/13980821/projected-standings-2015-16

I'm going to guess 24 wins myself.

Good post and point taken. But. Last year the predicted top four in the East were...

1. Boston (wins: 49)
2. Cleveland. (49)
3. Washington. (47.5)
4. Milwaukie. (47).

The top four were:
1. Toronto (59)
2. Boston (55)
3. Philadelphia (52)
4. Cleveland (50).

The difference with Philly's projected and actual win total was 19. Indy 16. Houston and Dallas 10. Without putting too much effort into this, the system seems to be fairly robust when not much changes. When someone comes back from injury, or new acquisitions over perform, the system misses the mark. So, my criticism of ESPN stands. It is a reactionist group with no imagination.

It is possible that:
- Negligible improvement from current players + limited PT for new players + improvement from the West = 25 wins. OR
- Modest improvement + two talented rooks + disappointing performances from someone else in the West (who gets fired first?) = 30-35 wins.

In the case of the latter I can look forward to ESPN's dorky algorithm predicting a 35 win season for the Kings next year.

 

[King Baller]

In the 22 years NBA.com has been tracking Net Rating, there has not been one team that has had a net rating of -7.9 or lower (SAC 's netrtg was -7.9 this last year) and finished with a higher win total. Let that sink in.

The Kings record last year was not representative of their talent. Expecting an increase from 27 is setting yourselves up for disappointment.

When using the last 22 years of data (omitting the 2 years that had shorten seasons) shows the Kings should have been around 21.7 wins last year with a net rating of -7.9. I don't see any issue with ESPN's projection. 25 wins equates to us taking our net rating from -7.9 to -6.5.

Below is the graph of net rating by wins over the last 22 years with a linear fit added in (orange line) and R^2 called out (red text). It shows that a -7.9 net rtg should result in 21.7 wins (green dot).

The media sometimes doesn't give us a fair shake but this is certainly not one of those times.

View attachment 8299

So you are saying +30 wins is possible

 

[Kingster]

In the 22 years NBA.com has been tracking Net Rating, there has not been one team that has had a net rating of -7.9 or lower (SAC 's netrtg was -7.9 this last year) and finished with a higher win total. Let that sink in.

The Kings record last year was not representative of their talent. Expecting an increase from 27 is setting yourselves up for disappointment.

When using the last 22 years of data (omitting the 2 years that had shorten seasons) shows the Kings should have been around 21.7 wins last year with a net rating of -7.9. I don't see any issue with ESPN's projection. 25 wins equates to us taking our net rating from -7.9 to -6.5.

Below is the graph of net rating by wins over the last 22 years with a linear fit added in (orange line) and R^2 called out (red text). It shows that a -7.9 net rtg should result in 21.7 wins (green dot).

The media sometimes doesn't give us a fair shake but this is certainly not one of those times.

View attachment 8299

Please explain what this wins to net rtg correlation means.

 

[Kingster]

ESPN prediction 2017-2018 27.4
We won 27
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...otals-standings-every-nba-team-2017-18-season

ESPN prediction 2016-2017 32
We won 32
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/17886875/nba-projected-fall-forecast-standings-2016-17

ESPN prediction 2015-2016 34
We won 33
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/13980821/projected-standings-2015-16

I'm going to guess 24 wins myself.

My belief is that the predictors never do well when it comes to "turns" - a team making a decided move upward or downward from the trend.

In 2008-9 OKC had a record of 23-59 (.280). ESPN predictions prior to that season seemed on track: http://www.espn.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-OklahomacityPreview0809#

In 2009-10 OKC had a record of 50-32 (.610). Curiously, I couldn't find any predictions for that season from ESPN. They used to have a video that they showed, but apparently it isn't working. Call me suspicious. Maybe you can get it to work: http://www.espn.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Thunder

If you look at the Yahoo prediction for the OKC 2009-10 OKC season, this is what you get: 29-53. You can look it up on the net. (I couldn't copy and paste the address). Kelly Dwyer made the prediction, with sports, yahoo, bdl's 2009-10 NBA Preview Oklahama City Thunder being key words in the address. I doubt the ESPN predictions were any different from Yahoo's. Most of these guys are very comfortable in the land of consensus and straight line thinking.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

My belief is that the predictors never do well when it comes to "turns" - a team making a decided move upward or downward from the trend.

There are two different things going on here.

1) If you know a team's Net Rtg (or other +/- statistic) you can generally do a pretty good job of guessing what their record was, which implies that if you know what a team's Net Rtg is going to be you can do a pretty good job guessing what their record is going to be.

2) If you know what a team's Net Rtg was last year, you can't necessarily predict what it's Net Rtg is going to be this year.

 

[bajaden]

To me it starts with Joerger. He's got to demand the pace, and he's got to give the green light to Buddy, Hield, Bjelica, JJ, and maybe Giles to hoist open threes when they get them. Then he's got to demand that players get the ball to open 3 point shooters. Fox is a key because he's the point of the very fast spear, but it's not all on him by any means. If an outlet passer doesn't see an open Fox, he better get it quickly to some other player who is open. Also, when Fox goes out of the game, Yogi & Co. need to keep up the pace too. I keep harping on this one point, but I'm going to harp on it some more: emphasis needs to be put on quick outlet passes. Recently, I watched a couple of the old Lakers-Boston playoff series, and what you see is a Lakers' defensive rebound, and bam! the outlet pass is made immediately. None of this BS that we saw many times last year with the Kings where after getting a defensive rebound they hesitated and waffled, apparently not knowing what to do, who to throw it to, not having a plan of action. If the Kings can't even begin a fast break correctly, they can just throw the whole season in the toilet as far as I am concerned.

I think people have to understand something. Pace isn't about how fast you get the ball up the floor. That's certainly part of it, but if you push the ball up the floor, and then pound the ball for 20 seconds before getting off a shot, your not playing at a fast pace. I agree that if your shooters have a green light and the system is to simply get one of them an open shot, that alone should improve the pace. Of course they have to take the open shot when it's there, and many times last season they passed it up.

It's one thing to be unselfish, it's another to be stupid. Take the freaking shot when it's there..

 

['89 Kings Fan]

Our pace was super bad last season but defense still wins games. If you sort the Kings games played last season by Opponent's points per 100 possessions, when we held opponents to less than than 112.5 points per 100 possessions (Barely out of the bottom 1/3 of the league) we were 24-17 and the other 41 games we were 3-38. There just is no way you can win NBA games giving up 1.2+ points per possession.

Simply not playing ZBo, Koufus and Temple (A great interview, not a good SF defender) hopefully improves our defense another to hit 35 wins. Since improving your win total gets exponentially harder, going from 27 to 35 wins is much easier than 35 to 43. So I don't think it outside the realm of possibility. But it will require better coaching and scouting than anything I have seen from this staff in the previous two years.

 

[kingdivac]

Our pace was super bad last season but defense still wins games. If you sort the Kings games played last season by Opponent's points per 100 possessions, when we held opponents to less than than 112.5 points per 100 possessions (Barely out of the bottom 1/3 of the league) we were 24-17 and the other 41 games we were 3-38. There just is no way you can win NBA games giving up 1.2+ points per possession.

Simply not playing ZBo, Koufus and Temple (A great interview, not a good SF defender) hopefully improves our defense another to hit 35 wins. Since improving your win total gets exponentially harder, going from 27 to 35 wins is much easier than 35 to 43. So I don't think it outside the realm of possibility. But it will require better coaching and scouting than anything I have seen from this staff in the previous two years.

Kings need more consistent scoring and shooting above defenset at this point. They need a couple players to break the 20 ppg average, and lead the rest of the team. Or if they can have 4-5 players scoring high teens ppg, that might suffice. They were close to last in scoring last year and poor the year before that. They need offensive consistency. I think Hield and Fox are the top prospects to improve offensively. Having 7 guys at ~ 10ppg didn't and wont work. Joerger needs to reward great offensive performances with more minutes too.

 

[sactowndog]

I agree that the data coupled with reasonable assumptions shows that our win total will be around what ESPN predicted. However, I think those reasonable assumptions will not hold. the most likely thing will not happen. we will be an outlier in the amount of improvement we show. we will crush it next year and I need to place my bets accordingly..

I tend to agree but the wild card to me is Fox. Giles and Beli will be improvements. SF is a giant question mark and Bagley is a couple years away. I’m comfortable with Buddy and Bogi. Then their is Fox.... if he has the same “force the ball” inefficient season as last year, ESPN could well be right. If he actually can find his teammates on the 3 point line we have a good chance of being better.

 

[Kingster]

I think people have to understand something. Pace isn't all about how fast you get the ball up the floor. That's certainly part of it, but if you push the ball up the floor, and then pound the ball for 20 seconds before getting off a shot, your not playing at a fast pace. I agree that if your shooters have a green light and the system is to simply get one of them an open shot, that alone should improve the pace. Of course they have to take the open shot when it's there, and many times last season they passed it up.

It's one thing to be unselfish, it's another to be stupid. Take the freaking shot when it's there..

If I add one word, I agree with your post completely. It's not all about speed, but speed is certainly a primary element in pace. Even if the Kings don't have what would consider a good fast break opportunity, they need to get it past the half court line within four seconds. And if the other team makes the shot, the Kings should still try to run off of those makes. If the opponent is slow or tired, or better yet, old, slow and tired, the Kings need to take advantage of it.

 

[Kingster]

There are two different things going on here.

1) If you know a team's Net Rtg (or other +/- statistic) you can generally do a pretty good job of guessing what their record was, which implies that if you know what a team's Net Rtg is going to be you can do a pretty good job guessing what their record is going to be.

2) If you know what a team's Net Rtg was last year, you can't necessarily predict what it's Net Rtg is going to be this year.

In other words, you can't predict the team's Net Rtg for next year on last year's Net Rtg. Therefore, it's a worthless exercise to use it to predict next year's wins and losses.

Correct?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

In other words, you can't predict the team's Net Rtg for next year on last year's Net Rtg. Therefore, it's a worthless exercise to use it to predict next year's wins and losses.

Correct?

The first bit is more or less what I mean. My point is that Net Rtg (or very similar stats, like Margin of Victory) does an amazing job of correlating with record, it just doesn't do nearly so good at predicting the next years Net Rtg.

For instance, if you calculate the correlation between a team's MOV (easier for me to grab than Net Rtg, but same idea) and its record over just the last year, the correlation coefficient is 0.96, which is huge. You can explain 96% of a team's record simply by looking at its point margin. But if you compare teams' '17-'18 MOV to their '16-'17 MOV, the correlation coefficient is only 0.62. Yes, that's not at all bad, but that suggests that you can't capture over a third of the variability in MOV (and therefore about the same amount of variability in record, given the tight correlation between record and MOV) by just comparing to the previous season.

There are reasons for this, not the least of which are player movement, changes in coaching staff, addition of draft picks, player development, player aging, injuries and recovery from injuries, etc.

Just to belabor the point, the fundamental difference between the two comparisons is that in the first case (Net Rtg vs record), you are taking two different measures of what has already happened and seeing how well they agree, but there is no prediction. Both measures are taken on the same results from the past. That the agree so closely suggests that they are closely related, as we should expect point margins and record to be, as wins and losses come directly from point margins. In the second case (Net Rtg vs. Net Rtg subsequent year), you're trying to use one measure to predict an outcome that hasn't happened yet, and there's a lot more uncertainty in that.

I don't think I would call anything here a "worthless exercise". But I think we need to have an idea of how much value the exercise has, and what the pitfalls are.

 

[Sac.1989]

i like the data but i like our chances of beating the data this season.

Our additions whilst fortuitous are solid additions and we are going to get an upswing in production following the rookie seasons of Fox and Bogdan as well as Hield, following his first full year as a king. The addition of Giles and the production and focus we should get from WCS entering a contract year are also strong factors

The west has gotten stronger, notably stronger, but i like our chances of beating the odds and getting more W's than predicted.

Yogi and Bjelica really fit well with us, giving us legitimate depth, range and options. Our record will be determined by how well we learn to close games. I have no doubt in my mind that we can bang with the best. Consistency and closing games will be key.

Coach has to figure our consistent rotations whilst continuing player development. A lot rides on the shoulders of Dave Joerger, we get a few early wins and stay healthy and positivity will spiral.

I think this season really puts us there as a team to watch out for, we will surprise many.