RealGM

6-2 and all the appearances of a legit playoff team?

Are we all just so used to failure that we just ignored the reasons why this team could be good?

I think we universally liked the pickup of Simmons, but should we have anticipated him adding THIS much to the team?

Should we have seen that Isaac would already be able to make a meaningful contribution?

Is Vogel simply THAT good of a coach?

Or is this 6-2 simply too small of a sample size.

Other than a strange desire to let the Brooklyn Nets score at will, I don’t see any glaring weakness. Now, these guys aren’t going to play at a .750 clip all year, but I do think this is a legit Eastern Conference playoff team.

And I will be the first to admit I did not think there was any realistic chance of that.

I've always thought and said we have talent but our fit was poor, always thought our players would look much better on other teams that were better built. This year we've seen 2 starts turn in to 3 point shooters which stretches the floor a lot and is allowing us to find that fit other teams have. Our bench was also horrible last season but now is solid. On defence we still give up a lot of points and can tighten up. Offence will drop off when our shooting cools off but it should still be much improved just from the spacing provided. I thought we'd battle for the 8th seed, we look like a 6-7 to me once the shooting cools off.

I really don’t know what to make of this. Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phrase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to the majority of the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

A .750 winning percentage is not sustainable. That’s just plain old common sense.

I’d say about 30 games, so end of the year, will we have a better idea of this team. Like I said, last year we weren’t just losing but losing badly. We are playing competitive games so far, and that bodes well going forward.

I had us as an 8th seed, but none of us could’ve predicted we’d start like this. I think we get the 5th or 6th seed now.

Obviously early, but even Vegas had us at 34.5 wins (after mysteriously having us around 40 wins for a day or so).

This start has been incredible. I better start seeing those old Magic logo magnets on car bumpers again - we're back.

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

do you expect aaron gordon to shoot above 50% from three for the season? or fournier to shoot over 55% from three? we have multiple guys who are shooting above 50% from the field. there's zero chance we sustain these shooting number over an entire season and if we did it would be historic.

the question is how badly does it hurt us when our shooting numbers drop off

Our talented players are finally clicking. We now have defined roles in our team. Vogel is trusting our talent and not immediately switiching to veterans. Out vets are actually pretty good this year...Mo Speights looks like a great locker room presence. Affalo wanted to come back to Orlando...he'll be big for us during the season (I'm sure of it). Augustin has played within himself.

Oladipo and Harris would never have worked for us. Sure, we didn't get are money's worth in those trades...but they were necessary to be moved. What actually hurts is losing Sabonis last year on draft day....he'd been a great backup for Vucevic.

Gordon finally has that confidence that this can be his team along with Evan.

I wouldn't change anything besides trying to get Isaac more opportunities to score...he looks very smooth out there with his dribbling and shooting...Henzonja or Rookie Gordon never looked this good. Guy looks like he's gonna be great in Year 2...needs to target that Small Forward position in the Summer.

bargnanimvp wrote:

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

do you expect aaron gordon to shoot above 50% from three for the season? or fournier to shoot over 55% from three? we have multiple guys who are shooting above 50% from the field. there's zero chance we sustain these shooting number over an entire season and if we did it would be historic.

the question is how badly does it hurt us when our shooting numbers drop off

How did Golden State all of a sudden win the Championship (the first one?). Curry was good, but became a superstar. Klay, Draymond, and Harris all chipped in that 1st year. I'm getting ahead of myself, but maybe we are just a good team that is hard to beat. God I wish we can sustain this and get back to the Finals. It will depend on how Payton works with this group. Can he also step up another level...because if he does, we are a top tier team.

Payton should just focus on being a lock down defender and playmaker. Just forget shooting jumpers.

J_Magic wrote:

bargnanimvp wrote:

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:
I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

do you expect aaron gordon to shoot above 50% from three for the season? or fournier to shoot over 55% from three? we have multiple guys who are shooting above 50% from the field. there's zero chance we sustain these shooting number over an entire season and if we did it would be historic.

the question is how badly does it hurt us when our shooting numbers drop off

How did Golden State all of a sudden win the Championship (the first one?). Curry was good, but became a superstar. Klay, Draymond, and Harris all chipped in that 1st year. I'm getting ahead of myself, but maybe we are just a good team that is hard to beat. God I wish we can sustain this and get back to the Finals. It will depend on how Payton works with this group. Can he also step up another level...because if he does, we are a top tier team.

Payton should just focus on being a lock down defender and playmaker. Just forget shooting jumpers.

curry and klay were not shooting 29% from three then suddenly in the 50s range like gordon....
fournier too has never shot close to the %s he is pulling right now
we have multiple players who are well above career averages warriors always had the numbers just not the volume and system to utilise it like they do now.

our shooting is going to drop off or else like i said this is going to be an insane historic season breaking a bunch of records.

the question is how far we drop off once our hot efficiency and shooting drops? personally i think we will stay a winning team but clearly not a top contender yet. people asking hos long is it sustainable is normal when a team is shooting this hot

bigpimpatl wrote:

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

A .750 winning percentage is not sustainable. That’s just plain old common sense.

I’d say about 30 games, so end of the year, will we have a better idea of this team. Like I said, last year we weren’t just losing but losing badly. We are playing competitive games so far, and that bodes well going forward.

Truer words were never spoken. Unless of course our Magic team is magically transported to the NCAA. So yeah.. maaybe 30 games in when other teams are settled and the wear adn tear aka injuries are gonna hit everyone in the league. Then we shall see.

MagicMadness wrote:Obviously early, but even Vegas had us at 34.5 wins (after mysteriously having us around 40 wins for a day or so).

This start has been incredible. I better start seeing those old Magic logo magnets on car bumpers again - we're back.

As a matter of fact I'm Moving my magnet from my fridge to my car tonight !!! Lmao

bigpimpatl wrote:

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

A .750 winning percentage is not sustainable. That’s just plain old common sense.

I’d say about 30 games, so end of the year, will we have a better idea of this team. Like I said, last year we weren’t just losing but losing badly. We are playing competitive games so far, and that bodes well going forward.

Forgive me for speaking for you, Johnny, but I think what he means is this general assumption that we won’t continue to play at a high level. It’s not about hot shooting or high percentages, it’s about the presumption that we have a bad team full of absolute scrubs because we don’t get any attention in the national TELEVISION media. The GB is the worst with this—you can pretty much predict the threads based on ESPN topic rotation.

Anyway, I think it’s all sustainable simply because we are winning games with really, really good defense. It’s not like we are just out there chucking and garbage is going in at a high rate. Everyone on the roster is playing into a system that works and is highlighting everyone’s respective strengths.

Charlotte just beat Milwaukee tonight be a pretty similar margin to our defeat as a microscopic sample, but I’d venture to say we are on the level of Milwaukee as of this moment in terms of a “leveled out” statistical performance. Maybe we are better, who knows? Frank has figured it out for us thus far.

MagicMadness wrote:Obviously early, but even Vegas had us at 34.5 wins (after mysteriously having us around 40 wins for a day or so).

This start has been incredible. I better start seeing those old Magic logo magnets on car bumpers again - we're back.

And Vegas moves their odds based off of how people are betting, so it would make sense that it was lowered if everybody is betting under.

EAS Law wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:
I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to proactively everyone on the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

A .750 winning percentage is not sustainable. That’s just plain old common sense.

I’d say about 30 games, so end of the year, will we have a better idea of this team. Like I said, last year we weren’t just losing but losing badly. We are playing competitive games so far, and that bodes well going forward.

Forgive me for speaking for you, Johnny, but I think what he means is this general assumption that we won’t continue to play at a high level. It’s not about hot shooting or high percentages, it’s about the presumption that we have a bad team full of absolute scrubs because we don’t get any attention in the national TELEVISION media. The GB is the worst with this—you can pretty much predict the threads based on ESPN topic rotation.

Anyway, I think it’s all sustainable simply because we are winning games with really, really good defense. It’s not like we are just out there chucking and garbage is going in at a high rate. Everyone on the roster is playing into a system that works and is highlighting everyone’s respective strengths.

Charlotte just beat Milwaukee tonight be a pretty similar margin to our defeat as a microscopic sample, but I’d venture to say we are on the level of Milwaukee as of this moment in terms of a “leveled out” statistical performance. Maybe we are better, who knows? Frank has figured it out for us thus far.

You have my permission to speak for me every single time because that's EXACTLY what I meant and was implying.

J_Magic wrote:Our talented players are finally clicking. .

Nobody predicted Orlando would go from a horrible 3-point shooting team to the league's best.

Orlando's 3-ball is simply unguardable, and that's why wins are piling on.

Magic_Johnny12 wrote:

bigpimpatl wrote:I really don’t know what to make of this. [*]Obviously it’s unsustainable but how far will we fall off? The two losses we’ve had have been close (single digits). That’s encouraging sign of competitiveness.

I'm really really starting to hate hearing this phrase.

From the casual fan to almost every sports media outlet to the majority of the general board.

Genuine question. How many games until it actually is "sustainable"?

It's not the correct statistical analogy. Our three-point shooting efficiency is unsustainable.

The question should be... at what point does the sample become representative for this season? This is something that can be calculated to a specific confidence level, but even then there are going to be outliers. If you calculate it for 95% (which is very high in statistical terms), then presumably it would be true in 95% of cases. Thirty is sort of a magical number in statistics, but the first 32 games of our 2015-16 season certainly wasn't representative of that team's season.

Regardless of what confidence percentage you are looking for, eight games isn't going to be sufficient to meet anything resembling representative. That said though, at no point during last season did we win six of eight games. In statistics, the larger sample is almost always the more predictive sample. So the short answer to your question is 82 games.

I'm just going to enjoy this start to the season and remain cautiously optimistic that this isn't another false dawn.

BlueBalls wrote:6-2 and all the appearances of a legit playoff team?

Are we all just so used to failure that we just ignored the reasons why this team could be good?

I think we universally liked the pickup of Simmons, but should we have anticipated him adding THIS much to the team?

Should we have seen that Isaac would already be able to make a meaningful contribution?

Is Vogel simply THAT good of a coach?

Or is this 6-2 simply too small of a sample size.

Other than a strange desire to let the Brooklyn Nets score at will, I don’t see any glaring weakness. Now, these guys aren’t going to play at a .750 clip all year, but I do think this is a legit Eastern Conference playoff team.

And I will be the first to admit I did not think there was any realistic chance of that.

multiple things.

Vogel never as bad a coach as people made him out to be. Mistakes made last year, but he was also learning a completely new team, new personnel, player dynamics, strengths and weaknesses.

Player development. Vuc finally adding 3 pt range, Gordon's shot looking better and his confidence growing in both the shot and his offensive game. Just looking at those 2, i have a little more hope for Elf and his shot (if he would cut that frickin hair just a little).

And Simmons has added a lot to the team mentality and locker room. I was happy for the signing, but as an older player just getting chances, was not expecting all that he has brought with him.