2024-25 NBA Season Discussion

[eminence]

Over the past three years the Nuggets are 11-16 (-3.4) without Jokic, which makes the idea that they are some horrific team without him pretty untenable. A roster is not bad just because it is starter heavy (see also the 1997 Hawks, the 1997 Jazz, the 2013 Pacers…).

Do you have any strength of schedule info on those 27 games? It's probably pretty balanced, but I'm just curious.

I got the opponents as an average +1.4 Net rating, so probably a bit above average. +2.1 median

~35 wins/82 performance without Jokic in 27 games (no player adjustments, just do a whole apm at that point).

So in the range of a +20 regular season win swing with Jokic.

[Special_Puppy]

I’m once again asking if I’m dumb for thinking of the Clippers as sleeper contenders

[metta-tonne]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

[metta-tonne]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

2 questions for me

are Kawhi's legs going to combust like the last couple times

is Zubac's defense going to stay good vs downhill tension like luka and butler

[RCM88x]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

Wow I just checked and had not idea that they're above a 13 SRS on bbref, you're probably right.

No team has ever been above 11.8 and they're at 13.14

[Outside]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

Wow I just checked and had not idea that they're above a 13 SRS on bbref, you're probably right.

No team has ever been above 11.8 and they're at 13.14

OKC has a large number of blowout wins this season:

10+ margin of victory -- 48 games
20+ -- 20
30+ -- 7
40+ -- 1

MOV doesn't correlate exactly with SRS, but it's pretty close; BBRef defines it as "a team rating that takes into account average point differential and strength of schedule." There's a formula, but it's basically net rating (average point differential) adjusted for SOS. OKC's SRS (13.14) tracks with their net rating (+13.2).

So the question is, what does OKC's historically great SRS really mean? Are they so good that they're in the discussion with ATG teams? Given the ridiculous strength of the West, I am almost shocked that a team from the East won't have the best record; OKC did that. Shai is awesome. Their depth is outstanding. Daigneault is a good coach. Their roster construction and chemistry are really good. Hartenstein and Caruso were great adds.

So far, so good. OKC still has to prove themselves in the PS. That will tell us whether their SRS is indicative of the quality of their team or a basic stat skewed by blowout wins.

As far as the RS wins record:

-- The West is so tough that I don't think it's a realistic goal. IIRC, most predictions for this season were that no team in the West would get 60 wins. With 62 wins, OKC has done more than anyone thought possible this season. Talking up breaking the 73-win record? I don't buy it. "Healthy OKC" -- well, everyone has to deal with injuries. Depth, which is supposed to be their superpower, has helped them get through their injuries this year.

-- On the plus side, Phil Jackson pointed out that residing in the middle of country made travel easier and helped the Bulls break the record. OKC has that advantage.

-- Win 20 to start the season, then talk about it. 74-8? That's absurdly hard.

-- As a Warriors fan, I'd say the 73-win season was great, but it's arguable whether it was worth it.

[TheGOATRises007]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

Wow I just checked and had not idea that they're above a 13 SRS on bbref, you're probably right.

No team has ever been above 11.8 and they're at 13.14

OKC has a large number of blowout wins this season:

10+ margin of victory -- 48 games
20+ -- 20
30+ -- 7
40+ -- 1

MOV doesn't correlate exactly with SRS, but it's pretty close; BBRef defines it as "a team rating that takes into account average point differential and strength of schedule." There's a formula, but it's basically net rating (average point differential) adjusted for SOS. OKC's SRS (13.14) tracks with their net rating (+13.2).

So the question is, what does OKC's historically great SRS really mean? Are they so good that they're in the discussion with ATG teams? Given the ridiculous strength of the West, I am almost shocked that a team from the East won't have the best record; OKC did that. Shai is awesome. Their depth is outstanding. Daigneault is a good coach. Their roster construction and chemistry are really good. Hartenstein and Caruso were great adds.

So far, so good. OKC still has to prove themselves in the PS. That will tell us whether their SRS is indicative of the quality of their team or a basic stat skewed by blowout wins.

As far as the RS wins record:

-- The West is so tough that I don't think it's a realistic goal. IIRC, most predictions for this season were that no team in the West would get 60 wins. With 62 wins, OKC has done more than anyone thought possible this season. Talking up breaking the 73-win record? I don't buy it. "Healthy OKC" -- well, everyone has to deal with injuries. Depth, which is supposed to be their superpower, has helped them get through their injuries this year.

-- On the plus side, Phil Jackson pointed out that residing in the middle of country made travel easier and helped the Bulls break the record. OKC has that advantage.

-- Win 20 to start the season, then talk about it. 74-8? That's absurdly hard.

-- As a Warriors fan, I'd say the 73-win season was great, but it's arguable whether it was worth it.

I mean clearly that entire season panned out great either way.

Fell short in the finals, but then you get KD and 2 rings as well.

If he doesn't get hurt, you guys easily 3-peat before he bolts.

[sp6r=underrated]

Last night I watched Suns-Rockets. The Rockets are a very good club and Phoenix's antithesis when it comes to in-game engagement but a non-tanking team should never lose in the matter Phoenix did.

The Suns were listless prior to Durant's injury whose presence on the court was barely noticeable. After they gave up. This is the second straight good coach they've quit on and I'm not sure what out Phoenix has.

Beale is unmoveable and Booker hasn't developed since 2021. Durant is the moveable part but he's very old and coming off two franchise failures.

They lost to Milwaukee in that finals and while the Bucks aren't in a great shape they still feel substantially better than Phoenix.

[parsnips33]

73-9 will always have been worth it cmon

I also never bought that it somehow contributed to Steph's injury in the playoffs, it was a freak slip

[parsnips33]

Zach Lowe freed from the paywall?

[lessthanjake]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

I’m very high on the Thunder and think they should be regarded as the very clear title favorite, but I’m not sure this is true. Just for reference, they are 21-4 in games with SGA and Chet. Which is not any better than their overall win pace. They’re such a deep team that I don’t think the injuries have had much of an effect on them. One caveat on this is that they are 11-1 in games where all of SGA, Chet, Hartenstein, and Caruso played, but that’s a small sample of games and I think we’re stretching the meaning of “healthy” when we’re requiring that there be no issues at all even with role players (it’s just not a realistic bar, and their opponents certainly haven’t had that).

[Outside]

73-9 will always have been worth it cmon

I also never bought that it somehow contributed to Steph's injury in the playoffs, it was a freak slip

I didn't mean to say it wasn't worth it. It was a great achievement. That whole RS was magical -- the 24-0 start, absolute peak Curry being a GOAT-level offensive force, the double-bang win in OKC, strength in numbers, great defense, the emergence of the Death Lineup, going from Cinderella story in 2014-15 to an ATG squad changing the game on both ends of the court. I can see 73-9 lasting a very long time.

But given how the PS went, the RS will always feel bittersweet. Thanks to Donatas Motiejunas tripping over James Harden and spreading a sweat slick as wide as an oil tanker, we were deprived of what should have been the greatest season and the greatest individual RS + PS in Warriors history. I can never think about that RS without also remembering he trauma of that PS.

Should it detract from the achievement of 73-9? Maybe not, but there is validity to what the Bulls said after going 72-10 -- "it don't mean a thing without the ring."

As both a player and a coach, the painful losses stuck with me more than the wins. When I think of that season, there will always be a knot in the pit of my stomach.

[Special_Puppy]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

Wow I just checked and had not idea that they're above a 13 SRS on bbref, you're probably right.

No team has ever been above 11.8 and they're at 13.14

OKC has a large number of blowout wins this season:

10+ margin of victory -- 48 games
20+ -- 20
30+ -- 7
40+ -- 1

MOV doesn't correlate exactly with SRS, but it's pretty close; BBRef defines it as "a team rating that takes into account average point differential and strength of schedule." There's a formula, but it's basically net rating (average point differential) adjusted for SOS. OKC's SRS (13.14) tracks with their net rating (+13.2).

So the question is, what does OKC's historically great SRS really mean? Are they so good that they're in the discussion with ATG teams? Given the ridiculous strength of the West, I am almost shocked that a team from the East won't have the best record; OKC did that. Shai is awesome. Their depth is outstanding. Daigneault is a good coach. Their roster construction and chemistry are really good. Hartenstein and Caruso were great adds.

So far, so good. OKC still has to prove themselves in the PS. That will tell us whether their SRS is indicative of the quality of their team or a basic stat skewed by blowout wins.

FWIW if you remove "low leverage" minutes to dilute the effect of blow out wins, OKC is at a +15.6 net rating which is the highest ever going back to 2013 https://www.pbpstats.com/team-leverage-summary/nba?Season=2024-25&Leverage=Medium,High,VeryHigh

[parsnips33]

73-9 will always have been worth it cmon

I also never bought that it somehow contributed to Steph's injury in the playoffs, it was a freak slip

I didn't mean to say it wasn't worth it. It was a great achievement. That whole RS was magical -- the 24-0 start, absolute peak Curry being a GOAT-level offensive force, the double-bang win in OKC, strength in numbers, great defense, the emergence of the Death Lineup, going from Cinderella story in 2014-15 to an ATG squad changing the game on both ends of the court. I can see 73-9 lasting a very long time.

But given how the PS went, the RS will always feel bittersweet. Thanks to Donatas Motiejunas tripping over James Harden and spreading a sweat slick as wide as an oil tanker, we were deprived of what should have been the greatest season and the greatest individual RS + PS in Warriors history. I can never think about that RS without also remembering he trauma of that PS.

Should it detract from the achievement of 73-9? Maybe not, but there is validity to what the Bulls said after going 72-10 -- "it don't mean a thing without the ring."

As both a player and a coach, the painful losses stuck with me more than the wins. When I think of that season, there will always be a knot in the pit of my stomach.

Believe me, it still stings to think about. And I'll never not think about the last 2 and a half minutes of Game 7 when I think about that season. But there's something almost poetic to the highest high and the lowest lows of this team/era being inextricably tied like that.

[parsnips33]

One thing that struck me watching Cavs Clippers - Jarrett Allen has an extremely fluid and pretty game. I kinda assumed he was just a Capela like rim runner (which he is to some extent) but the guy has smooth moves and impressive touch for a guy with his size/athleticism

[tsherkin]

I’m once again asking if I’m dumb for thinking of the Clippers as sleeper contenders

Can't say I have a ton of faith in their ability to stay healthy. But they certainly have some interesting pieces. Harden's an excellent player. Zubac has been extremely interesting and fun to watch. Powell. Kawhi whenever he's healthy. And that D is legit.

[lessthanjake]

I’m once again asking if I’m dumb for thinking of the Clippers as sleeper contenders

Can't say I have a ton of faith in their ability to stay healthy. But they certainly have some interesting pieces. Harden's an excellent player. Zubac has been extremely interesting and fun to watch. Powell. Kawhi whenever he's healthy. And that D is legit.

Yeah, if they’re healthy, they could actually be a contender. In games where they’ve had all four of Kawhi, Harden, Zubac, and Powell playing, they’ve gone 15-6 with a +12.56 net rating. It’s not the largest of sample sizes, so that net rating is probably partially just noise, but it does suggest they’re really good if they’ve got all four. The fact that they’ve only had all four for 21 games is indicative of the fact that them staying healthy for an entire playoff run is pretty unlikely, though.

[tsherkin]

Yeah, if they’re healthy, they could actually be a contender. In games where they’ve had all four of Kawhi, Harden, Zubac, and Powell playing, they’ve gone 15-6 with a +12.56 net rating. It’s not the largest of sample sizes, so that net rating is probably partially just noise, but it does suggest they’re really good if they’ve got all four. The fact that they’ve only had all four for 21 games is indicative of the fact that them staying healthy for an entire playoff run is pretty unlikely, though.

Yeah, if they're healthy, they will be a violently difficult out.

[sp6r=underrated]

I’m once again asking if I’m dumb for thinking of the Clippers as sleeper contenders

They'd probably benefit the most if the NBA played best of 3s in the playoffs with 2-3 day minimum between games. But I can't see them making it through the full 2 month 20+ games playoff format without being derailed by injuries.

[metta-tonne]

Hot take: healthy OKC breaks the regular-season wins record

I’m very high on the Thunder and think they should be regarded as the very clear title favorite, but I’m not sure this is true. Just for reference, they are 21-4 in games with SGA and Chet. Which is not any better than their overall win pace. They’re such a deep team that I don’t think the injuries have had much of an effect on them. One caveat on this is that they are 11-1 in games where all of SGA, Chet, Hartenstein, and Caruso played, but that’s a small sample of games and I think we’re stretching the meaning of “healthy” when we’re requiring that there be no issues at all even with role players (it’s just not a realistic bar, and their opponents certainly haven’t had that).

Weren't the Warriors about that healthy? I think the no center games and different players like Chet coming in and out all cost them a few wins. It is kins of early since maybe they lose the rest of the games but if OKC ends with like 69-70 wins I feel there were def 4-wins hanging around there with all the absences