RealGM

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2018/08/05/nba-win-total-projections-westgate-superbook-warriors-rockets-lakers/911468002/

hmmm does 44.5 wins and 6th in the east seem right?

Yes

Sixth is an optimistic projection, imo. Boston, Philly, Toronto, are clearly better than us. Indy and Milwaukee, too, (maybe).

Sounds about right, I would rank eastern teams this way right now (alphabetical order ):

Trash:
Atlanta Hawks
New York Knicks
Orlando Magic

A bit better:
Brooklyn Nets
Chicago Bulls

Fight for 8th seed:
Charlotte Hornets
Cleveland Cavaliers
Detroit Pistons

Playoff teams:
Boston Celtics
Indiana Pacers
Miami Heat
Milwaukee Bucks
Philadelphia 76ers
Toronto Raptors
Washington Wizards

I think the Wizards have the talent to be a top-3 team but mediocre coaching (at best) and nonexistent mental toughness will not allow the team to take the next step.

From a previous post (I had us 5th - but I could see anywhere from 4th to 9th, so pretty close to you Eli (I think Cleveland won't be very good):

Note: this is just a regular season win SWAG! Nothing more
Note: I have more playoff teams than there are slots - I am too much a wimp to cut one of them.
Note: I have us 5th - but we could easily be 4th to 9th. I wouldn't disagree with you on any of those spots.

Playoff teams - Probably win more games than we do
Boston, Philly, Toronto, Indy

========

Wizards

========

Playoff teams - homer in me says we will win more games
Charlotte, Detroit, Milwaukee, Miami

========

Cleveland, Atlanta, Orlando, Chicago, Brooklyn, NY

daSwami wrote:Sixth is an optimistic projection, imo. Boston, Philly, Toronto, are clearly better than us. Indy and Milwaukee, too, (maybe).

You named 5 teams, and called the last two a "maybe"... so how is 6th "optimistic"

Seems about right, the Wizards just aren't very good.

Illmatic12 wrote:

daSwami wrote:Sixth is an optimistic projection, imo. Boston, Philly, Toronto, are clearly better than us. Indy and Milwaukee, too, (maybe).

You named 5 teams, and called the last two a "maybe"... so how is 6th "optimistic"

Last year we were the 8th seed. With 5 teams being clearly or maybe better than us (an argument could be made for Miami as well), I see the sixth seed as optimistic as there are apt to be teams that out-perform their projections. Where would you put them?

daSwami wrote:Last year we were the 8th seed. With 5 teams being clearly or maybe better than us (an argument could be made for Miami as well), I see the sixth seed as optimistic as there are apt to be teams that out-perform their projections. Where would you put them?

I won't speak for illmatic, but I think health is the biggest factor for the Wizards. I could see them finishing anywhere
from 4th to 10th in the east, though I think it's less likely they miss the playoffs than any other potential outcome. With that in mind, 6th is maybe a tad optimistic, but is pretty close to the middle of where I'd put them in the standings. The Bucks and Heat are basically in the same ballpark as the Wizards, frankly, and they all won 43 or 44 games last season. I think that the Pacers will have a better regular season record because they have the best depth of the group and that matters over 82 games, but otherwise they don't separate themselves on the talent scale.

daSwami wrote:

Illmatic12 wrote:

daSwami wrote:Sixth is an optimistic projection, imo. Boston, Philly, Toronto, are clearly better than us. Indy and Milwaukee, too, (maybe).

You named 5 teams, and called the last two a "maybe"... so how is 6th "optimistic"

Last year we were the 8th seed. With 5 teams being clearly or maybe better than us (an argument could be made for Miami as well), I see the sixth seed as optimistic as there are apt to be teams that out-perform their projections. Where would you put them?

I see the Celtics being the clear favorites for #1 seed, followed by Toronto as the likely #2. Philadelphia's success is heavily dependent on Embiid but his health is a question mark. IF he plays at least 60-70+ games the Sixers would be favorites for the #3 seed.. but that's a big if.

After those three teams, I think there's a morass of 3-4 teams that could move up/down and that grouping is where I'd slot Washington. Wizards-Pacers-Bucks all relatively close talentwise on paper

Imo a top 6 finish isn't "optimistic" rather I'd say it's the likely outcome. If they don't have any significant injury to Wall or Beal there's no reason not to expect a top 6 finish given the historical strength of Washington's starting lineup. And optimistically, if the Wizards see more minutes with Porter playing the 4 (lineups with Porter at PF have been elite in Net Rating for several seasons in a row) , a #3 seed wouldn't be out of the question imo.. especially if you get some slippage from a team like Philadelphia

The Wizards won 43 games last season with it’s most important player, Wall, playing only 41 games. A healthy Wall is worth at least 4-5 wins.

Add to that what I expect to be better center play and an improved bench and I think the Zards will be in the mix for a 4-6 seed next season.

Wall should be healthy and if he can return to '16-'17 form then maybe a more optimistic win total can be justiied, however, it isn't like the rest of the east isn't improving either, probably more so in relation to us.

Ignoring toronto, philly and boston since they have better elite talent:

Indy: They made a good addition with Tyreke, got rid of lance, and turner and sabonis are fairly young bigs with another offseason of development under their belt. I'd guess both those bigs can make bigger strides in production then Porter and Beal just based off age, but that gap could be closed. They got a better coach as well.

MIL: Their biggest gains are from a massive coaching improvement and Giannis being arguably either 1/2 best player in the east. I'm not sure I like their offseason save for letting Jabari walk but I think coaching alone should give em a 3-4 win game boost from last year.

Miami: They play hard, don't have much talent but they sure do play hard.

Det: Maybe they finally put it together this season? Their frontcourt seems like an offensive handful but i'm dubious about their defense.

Bulls: They are probably going to be an abomination defensively

Nets: I actually think they could be a 7-8 seed this year. They got some interesting wings and play a good style of offense.

DCZards wrote:The Wizards won 43 games last season with it’s most important player, imo, Wall playing only 41 games. A healthy Wall is worth at least 4-5 wins.

Add to that what I expect to be better center play and an improved bench and I think the Zards will be in the mix for a 4-6 seed next season.

I keep reading stuff like this, but I wonder, where were all those added wins before he got hurt?

The Wizards were just as average with him in the layup as they were without, not buying the notion that he's going to make this team demonstrably better.

A lot of people seem to be stuck on evaluating this team based on the stretch they had from later December to February in the 2016/17 season, but the overwhelming evidence is that they simply aren't much more than a slightly above average squad.

I don't see how Grunfeld did a better job putting a competitive team together this season than he did in any of his previous years.

queridiculo wrote:I keep reading stuff like this, but I wonder, where were all those added wins before he got hurt?

The Wizards were just as average with him in the layup as they were without, not buying the notion that he's going to make this team demonstrably better.

A lot of people seem to be stuck on evaluating this team based on the stretch they had from later December to February in the 2016/17 season, but the overwhelming evidence is that they simply aren't much more than a slightly above average squad.

I don't see how Grunfeld did a better job putting a competitive team together this season than he did in any of his previous years.

I think it has more to do with assessing the team based on more than just last season. The season before that they won 49 games and were the 4th seed, for example. Like it or not, the Wizards have decided to hinge their team on their stars moreso than on a strong system of plug and play players. Scott Brooks really did the same thing in OKC, too, so it isn't surprising, and the Wizards were already well on their way even before Brooks, so the hire made sense. It isn't that they don't have a system or anything like that - they obviously do. They just hinge their system on their stars' abilities to make plays and break down defenses rather than relying on ball movement and team play to do it for them. The perk is that their stars aren't old, so it isn't like they're going to drop off immediately. The drawback is that they don't have superstars, so their is a limit to how good they can actually be. When their players get hurt, things go really badly; when their stars all stay reasonably healthy, then they're right there for the 4th seed.

That said, yes, Wall was hurt last season. The catch here is that just because Wall was hurt last season doesn't mean he won't be hurt this season. And Beal has been pretty healthy the past couple of seasons. If Beal suddenly gets hurt, well... Porter has also been rather healthy for his career. He suddenly got hurt at the end of last season and the team went out with a whimper to the Raptors. If Porter is hurt, it's the same thing. The degree to which those 3 guys stay healthy really determines where on the 4 through 10 spectrum the Wizards finish in the east.

I_Like_Dirt wrote:I think it has more to do with assessing the team based on more than just last season. The season before that they won 49 games and were the 4th seed, for example.

This is precisely what I addresses with my comment about the 2016/17 season.

Washington played like a legit contender for the middle third of that season and haven't achieved that level of play since, yet people keep harping on that time they looked like a 50 win team and almost made the conference finals.

Eerily reminiscent of that year the Wizards led a decrepit Eastern Conference and Grunfeld legit felt like that group was a championship contender.

The Wizards are number one in woulda coulda, but when it matters, they're just slightly above mediocre.

Well, to be fair, 49 wins and the 4th seed is still a coulda shoulda woulda season. I don't see anyone suggesting they're more than that. The 6th seed won 44 games last season and it's fairly reasonable to assume it won't take 49 wins to get there. When everything comes together for the Wizards, they're a pretty good team, not an elite team, but a pretty good team that's able to challenge any other team in the east now that Lebron is gone. Things don't always come together for the Wizards, though, and the degree to which they don't come together, and they aren't going to come together for the entire season and the entire playoffs because it's unrealistic and they aren't designed to cope for significant stretches when things don't all work at the same time, is going to define where the Wizards finish.

To me, 6th seems pretty reasonable. The Bucks have the same roster problems the Wizards do, though Bud changes the equation a bit. The Pacers, whether or not they're a better team, stand to be better in the regular season at least, because they're better built for the regular season. The Heat? They're not good. Spoelstra doesn't get nearly enough credit for what he's doing there right now. I feel the Wizards could surpass them pretty easily. Teams like the Hornets and Pistons? It could happen, but I'll believe it when I see it.

queridiculo wrote:

I_Like_Dirt wrote:I think it has more to do with assessing the team based on more than just last season. The season before that they won 49 games and were the 4th seed, for example.

This is precisely what I addresses with my comment about the 2016/17 season.

Washington played like a legit contender for the middle third of that season and haven't achieved that level of play since, yet people keep harping on that time they looked like a 50 win team and almost made the conference finals.

Eerily reminiscent of that year the Wizards led a decrepit Eastern Conference and Grunfeld legit felt like that group was a championship contender.

The Wizards are number one in woulda coulda, but when it matters, they're just slightly above mediocre.

I mean, mediocre in the Eastern conference means a solid midtier playoff team.. that's kind of the point everyone here is making. It's the East.

Indiana last season was 12th in offense, 12th in defense ie basically the definition of "slightly above mediocre"... and they won 48 games, 5th seed.

I don't see how that's out of the question for Washington. No one is saying they're legit contenders - at least I'm not. But they're solid enough to be almost guaranteed a playoff spot (unless multiple key players suffer major injuries) with the upside to win a good % of their games if they get on a roll. At the very least, I'm excited to see Wall back healthy over a full season.. *knock on wood*

Will be interesting to see what the prediction thread holds - how many predict we will win 50 or more games... Seems like mid-40s is the consensus.

I see us in a fight for 1st seed or 4th seed at worse...
If we won 43 with wall injured 41 games i see us gettin about 7 more wins if he and beal can atleast play 65 games...
a dwight to gortat upgrade give us another 5 wins even if dwight decides to be a hofamer once every 15 games
Bench depth it self can net us a 5 more wins.. rivers, green arent the best players but both are capable nba players..
Brown can be promising...
Sato and kelly in contract year

I see a 60 win season

With the exception of boston... We habe mutiple positional mixmatches and for once a frontcourt mixmatch in a pretty weakend east...

I kno this isnt a positive wizards fan board...but this is ome of the best seasons to look forward to since signing paul pierce

deneem4 wrote:I see us in a fight for 1st seed or 4th seed at worse...
If we won 43 with wall injured 41 games i see us gettin about 7 more wins if he and beal can atleast play 65 games...
a dwight to gortat upgrade give us another 5 wins even if dwight decides to be a hofamer once every 15 games
Bench depth it self can net us a 5 more wins.. rivers, green arent the best players but both are capable nba players..
Brown can be promising...
Sato and kelly in contract year

I see a 60 win season

With the exception of boston... We habe mutiple positional mixmatches and for once a frontcourt mixmatch in a pretty weakend east...

I kno this isnt a positive wizards fan board...but this is ome of the best seasons to look forward to since signing paul pierce

Only 60? Gee... we won 76 games when we had Paul Pierce, didn't we?

What would "a positive wizards fan board" have to say about the record of this team over the last 5 years? 43 wins, 46 wins, 41 wins, 49 wins, 43 wins.

Now... there is nothing to make it impossible for this team to get back to its fabulous high water mark of 49 wins in the weaker conference. Assuming that everything goes extremely well. As in perfectly.

Then again, how about if everything goes perfectly for Boston, Philly, Toronto, Indiana, Milwaukee...?