Rosters are set. Now where do we rank?

[Tacoma]

If we don’t make any trades from here on out?

I see us in the play in territory. Above .500 if Ingram stays healthy. Under .500 if Ingram isn’t able to play 60+ games.

High end outcome - 45 wins.
Expected outcome - 43 wins.
Disappointing outcome - 38 wins.

I don’t see us winning our play in games. Back to F5 on tankathon for the rest of spring.

Considering our high outcome last year was roughly 40-45 wins if we didn’t get hurt / purposely tank, I’m not sure how we can say it’s 45 again this year when we’re undoubtfully improved.

Our expected wins is probably closer to 43-48, with a high end of 50-55 if everything breaks right

Projected wins at this time last year for this past season generally hovered around 30-35 wins (e.g., HERE and HERE), so from this perspective expecting ~10 more wins next season seems reasonable. We actually won 30 games with all the injuries so an expected outcome of 43-45 wins next season is still reasonable IMO and a high end outcome of ~50 wins may be reachable if all goes well which would put us around 5th seed territory.

But it's going to depend on what the new president does and, as it stands today, this team doesn't fit well together. So I expect material changes to be made before next season starts which would make any prediction made today, should be taken with a grain of salt.

[brownbobcat]

I agree - 50 wins is unlikely, but it is not out of the realm of possibilities.

I also don't think it was reasonable to characterize the Raps as a 35-win team last year. We won 30 games despite:

- pulling out some of the most shameful tanking for the last quarter of the season.
- Our starting lineup missed a combined 143 games (IQ/Dick/RJ/Barnes/Poeltl)
- This is not even accounting for even our bench was chronically injured (Shead the only player to play more than 65 games)

I would make a pretty strong argument IQ missing 50 games alone can account for 5 more wins. The shameless tanking to end the season was 4-5 wins right there as well.

Their record with all 5 of those guys was something like 2-5, they weren't exactly setting the league on fire. They won 25 games the year before and didn't make huge improvements, I would not have characterized this as a "true" .500 team last year.

Yeah I am not extremely interested in a 7 game sample size for the simple fact it is impossible to get any sort of momentum going if you play every 10th game together. FWIW, the top 4 guys (RJ SB JP IQ) played 9 games together and went 3-6. Those games were:

Game 36, 37, 38, 39 - vs MIL, @CLE, @NYK, @DET - so 4 of the top 6 eastern teams. These were 3rd-6th games of the year actually playing an entire game. RJ's first games back from injury. Etc. We went 0-4 here

Game 48 + 49 - vs CHI, vs LAC - IQ came back from injury and played 16mpg here. So 1-1, but really, can't even count these two games due to the minutes

Game 60, 61, 62 - CHI/ORL/ORL - Poeltl was put on a minutes restriction here. Scottie played less than 30 in 2 of the games. Pretty sure this is when we started sitting hte main guys in crunch time trying to lose. went 2-1

So really we had one single stretch of the season (game 36 to 39) in which we had our "core" 4 guys available. Not nearly enough sample to even determine a damn thing lol

You've got the entire season as a sample size.

[YogurtProducer]

Their record with all 5 of those guys was something like 2-5, they weren't exactly setting the league on fire. They won 25 games the year before and didn't make huge improvements, I would not have characterized this as a "true" .500 team last year.

Yeah I am not extremely interested in a 7 game sample size for the simple fact it is impossible to get any sort of momentum going if you play every 10th game together. FWIW, the top 4 guys (RJ SB JP IQ) played 9 games together and went 3-6. Those games were:

Game 36, 37, 38, 39 - vs MIL, @CLE, @NYK, @DET - so 4 of the top 6 eastern teams. These were 3rd-6th games of the year actually playing an entire game. RJ's first games back from injury. Etc. We went 0-4 here

Game 48 + 49 - vs CHI, vs LAC - IQ came back from injury and played 16mpg here. So 1-1, but really, can't even count these two games due to the minutes

Game 60, 61, 62 - CHI/ORL/ORL - Poeltl was put on a minutes restriction here. Scottie played less than 30 in 2 of the games. Pretty sure this is when we started sitting hte main guys in crunch time trying to lose. went 2-1

So really we had one single stretch of the season (game 36 to 39) in which we had our "core" 4 guys available. Not nearly enough sample to even determine a damn thing lol

You've got the entire season as a sample size.

Sure, if you want your sample size to be filled with injuries, tanking, and otherwise zero continuity from one game to the next.

[arbsn]

I think if we get a home-court play-in game it is exceeding my expectation. Better to have low expectations and be blown away than to expect 50 wins and be ultimately disappointed with 39 wins and a play-in loss

[brownbobcat]

You've got the entire season as a sample size.

Sure, if you want your sample size to be filled with injuries, tanking, and otherwise zero continuity from one game to the next.

And what's your sample size that shows they're a .500 team? Oh yeah, nothing.

[YogurtProducer]

You've got the entire season as a sample size.

Sure, if you want your sample size to be filled with injuries, tanking, and otherwise zero continuity from one game to the next.

And what's your sample size that shows they're a .500 team? Oh yeah, nothing.

There was that section of the year where we had everyone healthy (sans IQ), went 8-2, beat teams like GSW, BOS, ORL, etc. and everyone on this board lost their minds cause we ruined our tank.

Oh, or that we still won 30 games despite everything everyone has already said and it isn't crazy to think adding IQ, BI, CMB, is worth 10 wins.

Done replying to you. Your constant goalpost shifting and refusal to read other posts is actually infuriating

[bobbyp3588]

You've got the entire season as a sample size.

Sure, if you want your sample size to be filled with injuries, tanking, and otherwise zero continuity from one game to the next.

And what's your sample size that shows they're a .500 team? Oh yeah, nothing.

He’s absolutely right. You’d have to be out of your mind or drunk off your ass to attempt to draw any meaningful conclusions from last season that have any relevance to this season. Unless, of course, you’re wondering what to expect this upcoming season from the likes of Orlando Robinson, AJ Lawson, Cole Swider and Jared Rhoden.

[brownbobcat]

Sure, if you want your sample size to be filled with injuries, tanking, and otherwise zero continuity from one game to the next.

And what's your sample size that shows they're a .500 team? Oh yeah, nothing.

There was that section of the year where we had everyone healthy (sans IQ), went 8-2, beat teams like GSW, BOS, ORL, etc. and everyone on this board lost their minds cause we ruined our tank.

Oh, or that we still won 30 games despite everything everyone has already said and it isn't crazy to think adding IQ, BI, CMB, is worth 10 wins.

Done replying to you. Your constant goalpost shifting and refusal to read other posts is actually infuriating

You know this is you, right?

[Saul Goodman]

I think 6th seed is very reasonable. There are a lot of younger pieces you expect to take a step like Dick Walter Shead. Maybe Barnes can add a bit more offfensive consistency.

We haven’t seen much of Quickley healthy as a starting PG so it’s possible there’s another gear there where he can have a breakout year.

[YogurtProducer]

And what's your sample size that shows they're a .500 team? Oh yeah, nothing.

There was that section of the year where we had everyone healthy (sans IQ), went 8-2, beat teams like GSW, BOS, ORL, etc. and everyone on this board lost their minds cause we ruined our tank.

Oh, or that we still won 30 games despite everything everyone has already said and it isn't crazy to think adding IQ, BI, CMB, is worth 10 wins.

Done replying to you. Your constant goalpost shifting and refusal to read other posts is actually infuriating

You know this is you, right?

Nope, if you read my posts you’d understand I said it’s difficult to take anything from last season.

I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy of you only focusing on the small samples that confirm your bias.

[WuTang_CMB]

Read on Twitter

[brownbobcat]

Nope, if you read my posts you’d understand I said it’s difficult to take anything from last season.

I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy of you only focusing on the small samples that confirm your bias.

You are aware that Poeltl, Barnes, IQ, RJ and Dick all played together for a couple months in 2023-24, right? Oh, let me guess - something something sample size.

You're acting like it's some unfathomable mystery. They lost games because they weren't very good.

[StopitLeo]

Not contenders without an MVP level player on the roster.

If Ingram is healthy I think 4-6 is realistic. If we have injury problems then 7-10 is likely.

[tsherkin]

Not contenders without an MVP level player on the roster.

If Ingram is healthy I think 4-6 is realistic. If we have injury problems then 7-10 is likely.

Sounds about right. 45 wins and a first-round appearance would be really nice about now.

[ConSarnit]

Using the same scientific formula from last year:

62 healthy games: 35-27

20 unhealthy games where some combo of Poeltl/Barnes/Ingram are out: 8-12

43-39. Massive log jam from 6th-9th seed.

[tsherkin]

Using the same scientific formula from last year:

62 healthy games: 35-27

20 unhealthy games where some combo of Poeltl/Barnes/Ingram are out: 8-12

43-39. Massive log jam from 6th-9th seed.

That would be a successful step forward for us.