Does the Preseason Matter?

SoCalJazzFan · Post #1 » by **SoCalJazzFan** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:26 pm

We’ve all heard that it’s just the preseason, which is meaningless, right? Well, is the NBA preseason just to try out combinations of players, see if certain players will make the cut, and give the starters a break in period, and is more or less meaningless? Is the fact that the Jazz have won their first three preseason games, at times dominantly, meaningless? If the Jazz win all or nearly all of their preseason games, will it still be meaningless?

According to this article, http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2013/10/26 ... t-it-does/ the preseason record of a team does matter, at least on the opposite ends of the W/L spectrum (teams that do really well in preseason make it to playoffs, while those that do really poorly do not).

This article, http://www.82games.com/preseason.htm, based on data from several years ago, implies that if a team did poorly in the regular season the year before, but has a good preseason record the next year, that preseason can be an indicator that the team will improve quite a bit that season (an average of 19 games). PHX had a 25-57 record in the 2012/13 season, hired a new coach and had a 5-2 preseason record last year, and ended up with a 48-34 record- a 23 win increase!

However, lest we get too excited, this article http://hoopdata.com/blogengine/post/201 ... atter.aspx based on more recent and a wider range of data implies that while there is a correlation between preseason and the regular season win totals, it is not a strong one. However, the article did note that no team that finished .857 or higher in preseason finished with a losing record that regular season.

So, if the Jazz end up with 7 wins this preseason, the statistical data indicates that the Jazz will win at least 41 games, and could be in playoff contention. In the meantime, I’ll see how the remaining 10 days play out.

The59Sound · Post #2 » by **The59Sound** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:42 pm

I'm pretty sure our pre-season record was 8-0 the year we imploded and traded Deron.

SoCalJazzFan · Post #3 » by **SoCalJazzFan** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:50 pm

The59Sound wrote:I'm pretty sure our pre-season record was 8-0 the year we imploded and traded Deron.

Good memory. One of the articles addresses that team/season as the only anomaly. However, the Jazz had a winning record (31-22) before that happened, and were well on their way to another playoff appearance before Sloan quit and, as you said, the season imploded.

Post #4 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:58 pm

The pre-season definitely matters in terms of practice time with different linups, combinations, see how new players perform vs NBA competition, how returning players worked on themselves and their games, and it gives a valuable time to experiment without the pressure or expectations for wins.

The pre-season definitely matters in a lot of things, and is a very important part of preparing a team for the season. Where it doesn't matter, is in the W\L columns, since they don't really count for anything. Also, we always have to take pre-season with a dash of skepticism when it relates to how players perform, because the reasons already mentioned.

So:

SoCalJazzFan wrote:We’ve all heard that it’s just the preseason, which is meaningless, right? Well, is the NBA preseason just to try out combinations of players, see if certain players will make the cut, and give the starters a break in period, and is more or less meaningless?

No. This is important.

SoCalJazzFan wrote: Is the fact that the Jazz have won their first three preseason games, at times dominantly, meaningless? If the Jazz win all or nearly all of their preseason games, will it still be meaningless?

Yes. They don't count for the team's record, and just like the Jazz might be experimenting and finding what they got, so do other teams.

Post #5 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:00 pm

I guess as much as practice matters. *queue Iverson*

HolyToledo12 · Post #6 » by **HolyToledo12** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:05 pm

It does matter not so much regarding record, but as to how the team is playing and the Jazz are playing well. The Jazz last were terrible in pre-season and everyone said its just pre-season but they started the season liked they played in the pre-season. So yes it does matter as to how you are playing as a team in pre-season.

The59Sound · Post #7 » by **The59Sound** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:20 pm

Should've read your link before commenting. It's an interesting idea. I'll have to look at the numbers, but I'd be interested in the correlation between pre-season performance and the PREVIOUS season (I'm wondering if existing chemistry/stability are a significant factor).

Post #8 » by **FJS** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:23 pm

Depend. It doesn't matter to spurs due to they are old and can rest their guys. Then they are gonna to play excellent due to they are playing togheter for so many years but it's important for us because this give us chemistry and confidence and that it's very important to us. With that we're going to play a lot better into the season and win a few games more than if we don't have it.

Post #9 » by **Inigo Montoya** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:33 pm

Just wanted to say thanks to SoCalJazzFan for the links - interesting read.

Dry Fly · Post #10 » by **Dry Fly** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:40 pm

I don't think that you can infer too much from a preseason record translating to a season record. But like everyone else is saying... you can infer HOW a team is playing in the preseason... and it is definitely a positive for the Jazz.

jazzfanWA · Post #11 » by **jazzfanWA** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:04 pm

Keep in mind that the Jazz would have lost in Portland had Lilliard played and Snyder didn't re-insert the starters to finish out in the 4th against Portland's scrubs. The better, established teams aren't going to tax their key players with substantial minutes or call upon them to finish out a meaningless game. Having said that, the Jazz have been playing well and are more than one step ahead of last year.

jazzfanWA · Post #12 » by **jazzfanWA** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:04 pm

Keep in mind that the Jazz would have lost in Portland had Lilliard played and Snyder didn't re-insert the starters to finish out in the 4th against Portland's scrubs. The better, established teams aren't going to tax their key players with substantial minutes or call upon them to finish out a meaningless game. Having said that, the Jazz have been playing well and are more than one step ahead of last year.

BudTugly · Post #13 » by **BudTugly** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:33 pm

It matters the same way it does for any other sport which is not at all in terms of the scoreboard.

But it's a pretty big deal for teams that have significant changes. Preseason is big for us and the Cavs but not so much for the Spurs and Bulls who mainly just want to get through injury free.

Nobody really puts a lot of dedicated effort into defense so scoring is a little easier, but observable functionality is a pretty good indicator that the team is headed in the correct direction.

The59Sound · Post #14 » by **The59Sound** » Wed Oct 15, 2014 11:56 pm

jazzfanWA wrote:Keep in mind that the Jazz would have lost in Portland had Lilliard played and Snyder didn't re-insert the starters to finish out in the 4th against Portland's scrubs. The better, established teams aren't going to tax their key players with substantial minutes or call upon them to finish out a meaningless game. Having said that, the Jazz have been playing well and are more than one step ahead of last year.

Oddly enough, Parker and Duncan did play heavy minutes against Denver this pre-season. But I think your point holds up in most cases.

EDIT: Denver? Why was that my recollection? It was Berlin. And it makes sense in that context that the stars would play big minutes.

SoCalJazzFan · Post #15 » by **SoCalJazzFan** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 12:15 am

In retrospect, I wish I would have used the word "correlate" instead of "matter" in the title, as this post was based on me wondering if the Jazz' preseason record would have any correlation to how well they might do this year. Turns out there is a correlation, and the correlation is even stronger when the team did poorly the season before.

falcon107 · Post #16 » by **falcon107** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:06 am

Preseason means something. If a team starts winning at the preseason, the expectation is that this will move to the regular season. Jazz now showing signs of improvement, if Jazz showed these signs losing all the games, still it would be something, but winning all games, furthermore shows that the team now also has mentality changes, and that we can expect more from Utah.

Let Utah finish all its preseason games and we will have more points to discuss...

Post #17 » by **FJS** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 3:44 pm

Last preseasons:
02: 5-3 = playoffs
03: 4-4 = playoffs
04: 7-1 = 41-41 seasons, with a lot of scrubs, no playoffs
05: 3-4 = horrible season
06: 2-5 = no playoffs
07: 4-4 = WCF
08: 4-3 = playoffs
09: 4-3 = playoffs
10: 6-2 = playoffs
11: 8-0... season Sloan resign. At one point we were 21-9 and finish mid season 27-14.
12: 1-1 = playoffs
13: 5-3 = horrible season.

So, it's not a good indicator, but show some interesting things.

I think the way they are playing and trying, they are going to be a 20-25 team for sure.

Luigi · Post #18 » by **Luigi** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:42 pm

The59Sound wrote:I'm pretty sure our pre-season record was 8-0 the year we imploded and traded Deron.

I think we also didn't lose a preseason game the year Jerry coached a d-league team to 500.

I think it just shows that part of preseason prep for our staff is winning. Most teams don't care in the preseason, so winning is easy if you include it in your prep list.

SoCalJazzFan · Post #19 » by **SoCalJazzFan** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:41 pm

I'm not really trying to take any position on this, but rather thought I would share what I learned from some web searching as to whether there was a correlation between preseason wins/losses and that season's record. The strong correlation comes from winning all, or nearly all, of your preseason games, which one article indicated led to a playoff appearance.

However, I am not sure that I want the Jazz to win around 40 games, as they probably won't make the playoffs, and won't have a great draft pick either. Instead, what I would like to see is the Jazz be very competitive and improve, but lose most of their games so as to get a chance to pick Towns, who I have my eye on in this draft. That could make the decision to let Kanter go, even without any return, easier, and would free up some cash to chase a free agent or two this summer.

falcon107 · Post #20 » by **falcon107** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:21 pm

SoCalJazzFan wrote:However, I am not sure that I want the Jazz to win around 40 games, as they probably won't make the playoffs, and won't have a great draft pick either. Instead, what I would like to see is the Jazz be very competitive and improve, but lose most of their games so as to get a chance to pick Towns, who I have my eye on in this draft. That could make the decision to let Kanter go, even without any return, easier, and would free up some cash to chase a free agent or two this summer.

You want the team to improve but lose most of their games. This doesn't happen. If the team improves as we see early signs of the team will win more than 40, if not well games won will decrease...

From now and on Utah will lose its chance for higher draft picks. So selecting the right players at the draft, finding the gem will be harder, and trades will be more important.