GSW at 20-10?

TwentyOne920 · Post #21 » by **TwentyOne920** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:32 pm

tsherkin wrote:I know, it was ridiculous.

In 2008, Denver had 50 wins to take the 8th seed, the Warriors 9th with 48. In 2009, the Jazz at the 8th slot had 48 wins and the Suns had 46 in the 9th slot. In 2010, you've already posted the 6-8 seeds but the 9th-seed Rockets were also a 42-win team.

The Grizz and Hornets had 46 wins in the 7/8 seeds in 2011, the Rockets with 43 in 9th. Last year, the Jazz and Mavs both had 36 wins (or the equivalent of 44.7 wins, so basically 45) and the 9th-seed Rockets again had the equivalent of 42 wins. The WC is not easy, man, not at all. It's a rough time sneaking into the playoffs, there's a pretty small margin of error even early on in the season if you start digging yourself a hole early.

Which is why the Lakers dropping their easy home-heavy schedule early on will not help. Nash returning has helped but they're in a much tougher stretch than early on.

Post #22 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:53 pm

TwentyOne920 wrote:Which is why the Lakers dropping their easy home-heavy schedule early on will not help. Nash returning has helped but they're in a much tougher stretch than early on.

Oh, they're going to have a party trying to claw their way up the standings, for sure. Nash will help a lot, but in order to win, they're going to need a lot more on the defensive end from Dwight as he gets healthier and they need to figure out a better way to manage the bench and to get Pau involved in the spots he liked. A goodly chunk of the reason they won in the 2010 Finals was Gasol going HAM on the Celtics in the 4Q of game 7, doing work in and around the key, and he's too skilled and effective a tool to overlook and have chucking 20-foot bombs all game (exaggeration, of course, but you know what I mean).

nitetrain8603 · Post #23 » by **nitetrain8603** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:00 pm

I don't think Bogut is going to have a big positive impact on this team. If anything, they'll keep the status quo with him. I'm surprised, even with the creampuff schedule. I was wrong about Mark Jackson so far.

9abovetherim · Post #24 » by **9abovetherim** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:31 pm

UGA Hayes wrote:Mama there goes that team!

I'm pretty surprise even with a weakened schedule. I actually thought this team would be good too, but with Bogut. Doing it without him and while playing 3 rooks decent minutes is an impressive achieevement

And this is all without Bogut and Rush. Just imagine what will happen when we get our two best defenders back. I'm really enjoying our rookies; they've contributed more than I could've ever imagined. Thank the lord we landed Draymond in the 2nd round.

90sAllDecade · Post #25 » by **90sAllDecade** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:38 pm

Kinda surprising. Although, they have a talented team with competitors on their roster & bench now. They've improved offensively and more importantly defensively, Mark Jackson is definitely in the early COY conversation.

Post #26 » by **floppymoose** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:26 pm

tsherkin, has their SOS really been that light? I just grabbed the first SOS rating I found, which is here:
http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/ranking ... le-by-team

Are they computing it hella wrong? Because it suggests GS has had a tougher than average schedule.

Post #27 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:34 pm

floppymoose wrote:Are they computing it hella wrong? Because it suggests GS has had a tougher than average schedule.

Look at the list of teams and their MOV in those games. I'm going off of basketball-reference, but again, my point isn't that their SOS is unimpressive, it's that the differential between their MOV and SRS suggests a lighter schedule, which matches with the competition they've faced during their wins in the season to date. Leave aside the particular numbers for a moment and just look at the ORTG/DRTG splits on the opponents they've faced, right?

Apathy · Post #28 » by **Apathy** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:50 pm

The biggest news for me wrt their 20-10 record is how much ground LAL r eally has to make up.

Hard to see LAL getting higher than a 6th seed. That's trouble, because LAC/SAS/OKC are powerhouses that will blow out whomever they face in the first round.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #29 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:01 pm

i'm holding out hope for a #1 seed and a first round matchup w/ the Mavs

DynastySS · Post #30 » by **DynastySS** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:24 pm

nitetrain8603 wrote:I don't think Bogut is going to have a big positive impact on this team. If anything, they'll keep the status quo with him. I'm surprised, even with the creampuff schedule. I was wrong about Mark Jackson so far.

Creampuff schedule? Has not been the toughest in the league, bit we did have an 8 game road trip after all.

ComboGuardCity · Post #31 » by **ComboGuardCity** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:30 pm

They'll finish at .500

Warriors Analyst · Post #32 » by **Warriors Analyst** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:33 pm

ComboGuardCity wrote:They'll finish at .500

The Warriors would have to go 21-31 to finish at .500. We've been 20-10 and you expect us to somehow finish out the season in an abominable fashion like that with Bogut back?

Awful take.

DynastySS · Post #33 » by **DynastySS** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:34 pm

ComboGuardCity wrote:They'll finish at .500

You believe after starting 20-10 they will go 21-31 in the last 52 games and end at 42-42?

Interesting.

Muggsy Bogues · Post #34 » by **Muggsy Bogues** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:40 pm

ComboGuardCity wrote:They'll finish at .500

If Curry and Lee both go down, maybe.

qianlong · Post #35 » by **qianlong** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:41 pm

Impressive. They are still waiting for Bogut and they have a good future too, Barnes, Klay and Curry can all improve, they lack in the star department, but looks like they probably have a playoff team for this year and some future.

Blame Rasho · Post #36 » by **Blame Rasho** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:09 pm

I think what is most unbelieveable is that they are a good rebounding team out of no where.

JimmyTD3 · Post #37 » by **JimmyTD3** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:18 am

As a W's fan this team has really opened up my eyes to the importance of a good bench.

Without Jack and Landry, we'd be 15-15 tops right now.

ComboGuardCity · Post #38 » by **ComboGuardCity** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:57 am

Warriors Analyst wrote:
ComboGuardCity wrote:They'll finish at .500

The Warriors would have to go 21-31 to finish at .500. We've been 20-10 and you expect us to somehow finish out the season in an abominable fashion like that with Bogut back?

Awful take.

Sorry I hurt your feelings but the bogut adjustment + more wc games makes me think this winning won't last.

NY2TheBay · Post #39 » by **NY2TheBay** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:01 am

ComboGuardCity wrote:They'll finish at .500

This has sour grapes written all over it. Have you even watched them play?

Bogut isnt a black hole bro, he is a top defending and passing big man in the league. They'll only get better once he returns.

ComboGuardCity · Post #40 » by **ComboGuardCity** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:05 am

NY2TheBay wrote:
ComboGuardCity wrote:They'll finish at .500

This has sour grapes written all over it. Have you even watched them play?

Bogut isnt a black hole bro, he is a top defending and passing big man in the league. They'll only get better once he returns.

Sour Grapes? I dont religiously follow any warrior rival. Adding any player and one that would like to be involved in the offense will cause some stumbling. The team is also not known for its durability. Good for the warriors but IMO it doesn't last.