Grantland's Nets Preview

[165bows]

new garnetts would look like that. he is automatic top of the key. shocked joe johnson is so horrible in the lane. i dont recall him missing many in that area. in fact before seeing that id have guess those short jumpers/1 handers in that area would have been by far his best spot

Yeah, it's interesting with those charts since they are compared to league average rather than a set number. I'm sure as concrete shooting percentage Johnson's numbers inside are better than his long range numbers.

The reference to FTs would be an interesting overlay to these charts, say eg a guy might be a high volume shooter from an area with below average efficiency, but if he draws tons of FTs there it might be an above average attempt type overall. No way that's incorporated into his current charts, correct?

[EGarrett]

We're super-underrated. Extreme maturity, chemistry, and the best bench in the league. #7 is a bit silly, but I don't mind it as we haven't proven anything yet.

[Trader_Joe]

We're super-underrated. Extreme maturity, chemistry, and the best bench in the league. #7 is a bit silly, but I don't mind it as we haven't proven anything yet.

Agree.
It's fine by me as a. I don't care what others think about us and b. I'd rather be under the radar.

I am fine with the following teams all being ranked higher

EAST
1. Miami of course
2. Indy since they took Miami to 7 and beat NY and Atlanta handily on the way, they also have much internal improvement to look forward to from George and Hibbert as well as their bench
3. Chicago as Rose looks great already

WEST
1. SAS since they were just in the Finals taking Miami to 7
2. Clippers as they've been a great regular season team for a couple season and had a good off-season ading Doc and shooters

Who I do not think should be above us:

1. GS - they match-up well and might beat us (as we could do to Indy, but this isn't a head to head vs. the Nets ranking) but they are very young and relatively unproven, and I don't take much from beating Denver
2. Houston - first year together with Dwight and major turnover. Questionable fits at PG and PF.
3. Memphis - I think their descent may begin this year as they didn't seem to keep up with the field and have questionable wing depth
4. OKC - RW out and a rather poor off-season other than finding Adams in the draft
5. NYK - a very questionable off-season and they've been unimpressive in the preseason

[DrazenForThree]

We're super-underrated. Extreme maturity, chemistry, and the best bench in the league. #7 is a bit silly, but I don't mind it as we haven't proven anything yet.

Agree.
It's fine by me as a. I don't care what others think about us and b. I'd rather be under the radar.

I am fine with the following teams all being ranked higher

EAST
1. Miami of course
2. Indy since they took Miami to 7 and beat NY and Atlanta handily on the way, they also have much internal improvement to look forward to from George and Hibbert as well as their bench
3. Chicago as Rose looks great already

WEST
1. SAS since they were just in the Finals taking Miami to 7
2. Clippers as they've been a great regular season team for a couple season and had a good off-season ading Doc and shooters

Who I do not think should be above us:

1. GS - they match-up well and might beat us (as we could do to Indy, but this isn't a head to head vs. the Nets ranking) but they are very young and relatively unproven, and I don't take much from beating Denver
2. Houston - first year together with Dwight and major turnover. Questionable fits at PG and PF.
3. Memphis - I think their descent may begin this year as they didn't seem to keep up with the field and have questionable wing depth
4. OKC - RW out and a rather poor off-season other than finding Adams in the draft
5. NYK - a very questionable off-season and they've been unimpressive in the preseason

i think its safe to say we wont be flying under the radar

im ok with: Mia, Chi, Mem, SA, OKc being ahead of us. thats a legit list.

Pacers no way, knicks no effing way

houston/golden state are right there with us, cant complain if they put them ahead imo but id take us

[Trader_Joe]

i think its safe to say we wont be flying under the radar

im ok with: Mia, Chi, Mem, SA, OKc being ahead of us. thats a legit list.

Pacers no way, knicks no effing way

houston/golden state are right there with us, cant complain if they put them ahead imo but id take us

Well.. relative to Miami, Indy, Chicago and maybe even the Knicks because of their unrealistic expectations we will in the East. The fact most have us at #4 in the East means we are under the radar IMO.

I don't see Memphis being a threat this year. They got beat badly by SA in the WCF and didn't do much this off-season to address their very questionable wing rotation. I also don't like their depth PG - SF.

OKC still has a major question mark in the middle with Perkins and at PG until RW is back, and their depth is lacking, as is their ability to improve the team. And while I'm not that into head 2 head, we crushed them in OKC as Blatche and Lopez destroyed them. We only lost by in BK because Lopez missed that game. I think we helped expose that they can be severely exploited in the middle as most of their losses were to teams with quality post play.

I don't think we proved anything about how to beat Indy, other than we match-up with them well, but again this isn't about h2h (for example in tennis Andy Murray having the edge in head to head against Federer doesn't mean Murray is the GOAT) you to have to gauge how they compare against the entire league.

I wouldn't be surprised if GS takes both games against us this year as they have too much speed, athleticism and shooting, but overall I think we will be the better team and with a better record. Though I do really like their team.. and I do like Houston, but I think Houston is about a year away from being a serious contender once they figure out their PG and PF situations. Then again the West looks wide open this year and I could see any of SAS, OKC, Houston, LAC, GS in the Finals pretty much in that order.

But I'm getting ahead. The playoffs are all about match ups. I think we can beat any team in the East other than Miami, and I don't know about Chicago.. Rose looks scary good.

[DrazenForThree]

Well.. relative to Miami, Indy, Chicago and maybe even the Knicks because of their unrealistic expectations we will in the East. The fact most have us at #4 in the East means we are under the radar IMO.

i dont think most have us as 4 in the east... i mean ESPN had us at what #3 OVERALL and SI had us 3rd in the east i believe. either way, even at 4th there is no way we are going under the radar... me we are underrated or not predicted as high as we should, but with tons of national TV games, and tons of buzz around us no way we go under the radar so to speak

I don't see Memphis being a threat this year. They got beat badly by SA in the WCF and didn't do much this off-season to address their very questionable wing rotation. I also don't like their depth PG - SF.

hard to know them for losing to a team that was a ray allen miracle 3 from winning the title. Also, you dont like Bayless? he was outstanding last season?

I don't think we proved anything about how to beat Indy, other than we match-up with them well, but again this isn't about h2h (for example in tennis Andy Murray having the edge in head to head against Federer doesn't mean Murray is the GOAT) you to have to gauge how they compare against the entire league.

its not just us that beat indy, i mean they lost 32 games last year. and were pretty bad vs .500 competition.

But I'm getting ahead. The playoffs are all about match ups. I think we can beat any team in the East other than Miami, and I don't know about Chicago.. Rose looks scary good.

i like out chances vs. everyone but those 2 teams as well in the east. hawks i think would give us some issues but we would still beat them in 5 or 6 games

[Trader_Joe]

Well.. relative to Miami, Indy, Chicago and maybe even the Knicks because of their unrealistic expectations we will in the East. The fact most have us at #4 in the East means we are under the radar IMO.

i dont think most have us as 4 in the east... i mean ESPN had us at what #3 OVERALL and SI had us 3rd in the east i believe. either way, even at 4th there is no way we are going under the radar... me we are underrated or not predicted as high as we should, but with tons of national TV games, and tons of buzz around us no way we go under the radar so to speak

I don't see Memphis being a threat this year. They got beat badly by SA in the WCF and didn't do much this off-season to address their very questionable wing rotation. I also don't like their depth PG - SF.

hard to know them for losing to a team that was a ray allen miracle 3 from winning the title. Also, you dont like Bayless? he was outstanding last season?

I don't think we proved anything about how to beat Indy, other than we match-up with them well, but again this isn't about h2h (for example in tennis Andy Murray having the edge in head to head against Federer doesn't mean Murray is the GOAT) you to have to gauge how they compare against the entire league.

its not just us that beat indy, i mean they lost 32 games last year. and were pretty bad vs .500 competition.

But I'm getting ahead. The playoffs are all about match ups. I think we can beat any team in the East other than Miami, and I don't know about Chicago.. Rose looks scary good.

i like out chances vs. everyone but those 2 teams as well in the east. hawks i think would give us some issues but we would still beat them in 5 or 6 games

Yeah, I guess I am more thinking in RealGM world, most have us #4 in the East.
I do think Miami may take us lightly considering what they did to us last season.

Memphis didn't just lose to SA, they got swept by an average of 11 point per game.
I don't like:
Allen/Bayless
Prince/Pondexter
as the wings needed on a true contender considering how perimeter oriented the league is.

Indy was a much better team the 2nd half of the season, as Hibbert played like he should have from the start. They're going to get improvement from him, George and their bench is much much better after scoring the 2nd fewest points last year.

[DrazenForThree]

Yeah, I guess I am more thinking in RealGM world, most have us #4 in the East.
I do think Miami may take us lightly considering what they did to us last season.

yea, general board not the best place...

i think miami wants to make a statement. i think they come out gangbusters for our home opener.

Memphis didn't just lose to SA, they got swept by an average of 11 point per game.
I don't like:
Allen/Bayless
Prince/Pondexter
as the wings needed on a true contender considering how perimeter oriented the league is.

allen is an elite wing defender. bayless is among the best backups in the league. prince isnt what he was, but is still an excellent perimeter defender. i really like what they have there. they can match up with any teams SG/SF combo. not a ton of scoring there, but conley can score form the point and they are a slow paced drag it out team

Indy was a much better team the 2nd half of the season, as Hibbert played like he should have from the start. They're going to get improvement from him, George and their bench is much much better after scoring the 2nd fewest points last year.

i dont know about much better. first hald they were 24-18, second half 25-14.

i think indy actually takes a step back. huge hype and guys got paid. tons more pressure on them now and the east got alot better. i think they win 44-46 games. Paul Geroge is going to be SUPER hate on this year when he doesnt play like a top 3-5 player. and everytime they lose its gonna be on him in the media. that team is really overrated.

[Paradise]

The reference to FTs would be an interesting overlay to these charts, say eg a guy might be a high volume shooter from an area with below average efficiency, but if he draws tons of FTs there it might be an above average attempt type overall. No way that's incorporated into his current charts, correct?

Correct, It's not incorporated but Joe has a FTR (Free Throw Rate) of 0.15 which is below league average compared to Paul's 0.39 which is way above league average.

[EGarrett]

We're super-underrated. Extreme maturity, chemistry, and the best bench in the league. #7 is a bit silly, but I don't mind it as we haven't proven anything yet.

Agree.
It's fine by me as a. I don't care what others think about us and b. I'd rather be under the radar.

I am fine with the following teams all being ranked higher

EAST
1. Miami of course
2. Indy since they took Miami to 7 and beat NY and Atlanta handily on the way, they also have much internal improvement to look forward to from George and Hibbert as well as their bench
3. Chicago as Rose looks great already

WEST
1. SAS since they were just in the Finals taking Miami to 7
2. Clippers as they've been a great regular season team for a couple season and had a good off-season ading Doc and shooters

Who I do not think should be above us:

1. GS - they match-up well and might beat us (as we could do to Indy, but this isn't a head to head vs. the Nets ranking) but they are very young and relatively unproven, and I don't take much from beating Denver
2. Houston - first year together with Dwight and major turnover. Questionable fits at PG and PF.
3. Memphis - I think their descent may begin this year as they didn't seem to keep up with the field and have questionable wing depth
4. OKC - RW out and a rather poor off-season other than finding Adams in the draft
5. NYK - a very questionable off-season and they've been unimpressive in the preseason

I don't think Clippers should necessarily be above us. They won the equivalent of 49 and 56 games the last two seasons...we won 49 last season. And the Nuggets won 57, so those aren't automatically impressive totals. They got JJ Redick and lost Billups, Butler and a few other guys, we got KG, Pierce, AK-47, Livingston and Terry. And they also lost in the first round.

I'll still accept the "we haven't proven it" argument, but the Clippers have hardly earned elite status.

[Paradise]

I don't think Clippers should necessarily be above us. They won the equivalent of 49 and 56 games the last two seasons...we won 49 last season. And the Nuggets won 57, so those aren't automatically impressive totals. They got JJ Redick and lost Billups, Butler and a few other guys, we got KG, Pierce, AK-47, Livingston and Terry. And they also lost in the first round.

I'll still accept the "we haven't proven it" argument, but the Clippers have hardly earned elite status.

I agree. I just don't honestly get how the Clippers are ranked ahead of us and I do like their team but they haven't done any better than we have. Their overall depth is extremely shaky and tonight proved that for example. They have the same questions we do, they lost in the first round in 6 games as we lost in 7 games. I get they added two elite 40% three point shooters but we added elite shooters/scorers that are two way players in comparison along with alot more depth and most importantly, both teams are equally in the "we haven't proven it" argument based off last season and off-season moves. In a head to head comparison, we should be on a higher note. I don't really think just adding Doc Rivers should sway the decision making in ranking both teams.

[MrDollarBills]

I really think a lot of people have no clue as to how dangerous we'll be in the post season if we're healthy.

[Trader_Joe]

We're super-underrated. Extreme maturity, chemistry, and the best bench in the league. #7 is a bit silly, but I don't mind it as we haven't proven anything yet.

Agree.
It's fine by me as a. I don't care what others think about us and b. I'd rather be under the radar.

I am fine with the following teams all being ranked higher

EAST
1. Miami of course
2. Indy since they took Miami to 7 and beat NY and Atlanta handily on the way, they also have much internal improvement to look forward to from George and Hibbert as well as their bench
3. Chicago as Rose looks great already

WEST
1. SAS since they were just in the Finals taking Miami to 7
2. Clippers as they've been a great regular season team for a couple season and had a good off-season ading Doc and shooters

Who I do not think should be above us:

1. GS - they match-up well and might beat us (as we could do to Indy, but this isn't a head to head vs. the Nets ranking) but they are very young and relatively unproven, and I don't take much from beating Denver
2. Houston - first year together with Dwight and major turnover. Questionable fits at PG and PF.
3. Memphis - I think their descent may begin this year as they didn't seem to keep up with the field and have questionable wing depth
4. OKC - RW out and a rather poor off-season other than finding Adams in the draft
5. NYK - a very questionable off-season and they've been unimpressive in the preseason

I don't think Clippers should necessarily be above us. They won the equivalent of 49 and 56 games the last two seasons...we won 49 last season. And the Nuggets won 57, so those aren't automatically impressive totals. They got JJ Redick and lost Billups, Butler and a few other guys, we got KG, Pierce, AK-47, Livingston and Terry. And they also lost in the first round.

I'll still accept the "we haven't proven it" argument, but the Clippers have hardly earned elite status.

I'm mainly evaluating the regular season success of these team as playoffs are very hard to forecast without knowing match-ups. The Clippers should be an elite regular season team.

[drza]

The reference to FTs would be an interesting overlay to these charts, say eg a guy might be a high volume shooter from an area with below average efficiency, but if he draws tons of FTs there it might be an above average attempt type overall. No way that's incorporated into his current charts, correct?

Correct, It's not incorporated but Joe has a FTR (Free Throw Rate) of 0.15 which is below league average compared to Paul's 0.39 which is way above league average.

It's at least tacitly incorporated, though, because shooting fouls don't count as field goal attempts. It's not the same as giving the credit for the FTs drawn, but it does mean that it doesn't count as a negative either.

[165bows]

The reference to FTs would be an interesting overlay to these charts, say eg a guy might be a high volume shooter from an area with below average efficiency, but if he draws tons of FTs there it might be an above average attempt type overall. No way that's incorporated into his current charts, correct?

Correct, It's not incorporated but Joe has a FTR (Free Throw Rate) of 0.15 which is below league average compared to Paul's 0.39 which is way above league average.

It's at least tacitly incorporated, though, because shooting fouls don't count as field goal attempts. It's not the same as giving the credit for the FTs drawn, but it does mean that it doesn't count as a negative either.

I was thinking it would be an interesting second level to these charts he does (which I think are great). Sort of spatial TS%, or something.

Thinking about it later, though, it does seem like defenses are probably in general smart about when they foul. In other words, they probably challenge harder (and foul more) when offensive players are in a position to take their better shots, or just challenge good shooter's shots harder overall. Still would be interesting to see some of the additional info it brought to light though.