Who do you expect to under perform?

Statlanta · Post #41 » by **Statlanta** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:30 pm

I don't know about you guys but I absolutely love the fact that posters can drop their opinions of underpeforming teams without getting blasted by other fanbases which could happen in a somewhat negative thread like this. And just like other fans I hope my team can prove some of these predictions wrong.

Hellcrooner · Post #42 » by **Hellcrooner** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:35 pm

Spurs?

parker, manu, lee, pau = too many people falling apart due to old age.

Masterfully · Post #43 » by **Masterfully** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:48 pm

Jazz easily.

Trouble staying healthy. Weakest where they need to be strongest (in the backcourt.) Stiff competition.

I could see them finishing around 32-33 wins.

Moose10Fan · Post #44 » by **Moose10Fan** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:54 pm

Jazz and Wolves.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

zeebneeb · Post #45 » by **zeebneeb** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:47 pm

Masterfully wrote:Jazz easily.

Trouble staying healthy. Weakest where they need to be strongest (in the backcourt.) Stiff competition.

I could see them finishing around 32-33 wins.

Well nba fans, the media, and Jazz fans themselves have set the bar so high it's going to be really difficult not to under perform.

I don't quite get it as I've stated in various other threads as they have some fine players, and a passionate coach but I've seen some ranking of the Jazz so high in the predictive standings it seems like mild insanity to me.

This is not a team that was great and then had injuries. This is a team that has done exactly nothing and folks expect 50-60 wins somehow. Are injuries a factor? Of course and it would be disingenuous to state otherwise, but let's see how they actually perform at full strength before putting them into the top 5 teams, or in the semi-finals, or wcf against the Warriors right?

It's like they are everyone's for sure pick when there is nothing supporting it.

Baffling.

Post #46 » by **jazzfan1971** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:16 pm

Jazz have been a bit over-hyped. And it's likely they won't reach those levels. I'm thinking 45-52 wins myself.

Post #47 » by **Prez** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:47 pm

*insert team whose fanbase I don't like*

OrlandoDream · Post #48 » by **OrlandoDream** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 7:25 pm

Heat and Bulls have taken a step back. I don't know how a Rondo and Dwade backcourt will thrive in today NBA that is dominate by 3s. Reminds me of the clunkfest of Elfrid Payton and Oladipo.

Heat resigned Whiteside but lost Wade, Bosh might not return, and let Deng go. I have them possibly missing be playoffs. Letting Wade go is one mistake Riley will regret.

JazzMan_OS · Post #49 » by **JazzMan_OS** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 7:31 pm

zeebneeb wrote:
Masterfully wrote:Jazz easily.

Trouble staying healthy. Weakest where they need to be strongest (in the backcourt.) Stiff competition.

I could see them finishing around 32-33 wins.
Well nba fans, the media, and Jazz fans themselves have set the bar so high it's going to be really difficult not to under perform.

I don't quite get it as I've stated in various other threads as they have some fine players, and a passionate coach but I've seen some ranking of the Jazz so high in the predictive standings it seems like mild insanity to me.

This is not a team that was great and then had injuries. This is a team that has done exactly nothing and folks expect 50-60 wins somehow. Are injuries a factor? Of course and it would be disingenuous to state otherwise, but let's see how they actually perform at full strength before putting them into the top 5 teams, or in the semi-finals, or wcf against the Warriors right?

It's like they are everyone's for sure pick when there is nothing supporting it.

Baffling.

The theory behind it is that Utah went on a ridiculous stretch two seasons ago after the All-Star Break where they were destroying teams (playoff teams at that) with stifling defense. Dante Exum replaced Trey Burke and Rudy Gobert replaced Enes Kanter in the starting lineup and the defense improved to #1 in the league practically overnight.

The Jazz haven't had their ideal starting lineup for nearly two seasons now thanks to injury. That run they went on would have earned them the 4th seed IIRC if it was for an entire year.

You factor in Utah playing Raul Neto and Trey Burke the majority of the season at point guard, Rudy Gobert, Derrick Favors, and Alec Burks missing significant time, and the Jazz were due to disappoint last season.

With health, I really see the Jazz finishing with 50+ wins. Snyder is a great coach, but still learning. With the additions of veterans and a legit point in Hill, Utah should see significant improvement.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

jswede · Post #50 » by **jswede** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 7:40 pm

el13adnino wrote:
ken6199 wrote:
el13adnino wrote:mozgov

Underperform means you had expectation. I don't have much on him.

Team-wise I think Portland, Boston might under perform. Both listed as first choice #3 candidate in their respective conferences, that's very high considering one has depth issue the other one still lacks a league top 10 superstar.

Off topic - Atlanta would be my dark horse pick.

lakers are expecting him to at least average his total career numbers ... i think he averages below that

Why would he not? 6 years in the league and he's been a consistent 13.6/10.0/1.8 per 36. Very consistent. He's 30. I think he'll surprise on the UPside, relative to expectations, inline w his per 36.

blind prophet · Post #51 » by **blind prophet** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 8:11 pm

Froob wrote:Milwaukee and Orlando probably. They seemed to get hyped up every year. Coaching may have held Orlando back, guess we'll see.

You think the Bucks get hyped up?

zeebneeb · Post #52 » by **zeebneeb** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 8:23 pm

blind prophet wrote:
Froob wrote:Milwaukee and Orlando probably. They seemed to get hyped up every year. Coaching may have held Orlando back, guess we'll see.

You think the Bucks get hyped up?

Last year the Bucks hype was silly.

This year after having taken a dose of reality, everyone is soft on the Bucks and rightfully so. They have made moves that are in the realm of insanity and they still have Monroe who obviously didn't fit when they signed him.

He should be sent out for anything at this point like SVG did with Josh Smith. (Stan just cut smith but there are parallels there). They need to move on, and forward. I find it extremely hard to believe that they can't find any takers for Moose. It reeks of incompetence.

Post #53 » by **Capn'O** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:34 pm

jazzfan1971 wrote:I think Portland is highest on my, could be like Phoenix, list. They both were unexpectedly good, performing far beyond expectations. Then Phoenix came back to the average of their expectations. I think this might be Portland's year to take a step back, not the step forward most are predicting. I think they were good because of 3 main reasons. #1 - incredible health. They may or may not be as healthy again this year, but you would reasonably expect an average amount of missed games this year. #2 - outstanding performances from role players. Gotta give it to the role players and coaching, they got every ounce of production tbey could last year. That might be hard to repeat, especially as opposing teams have a better scouting report on them this season. #3 - the emergence of McCollum. He could be even better this year, but opposing defenses will be more keyed to slow him down more.

Could go either way, but I'm predicting a 2 game drop from last year.

The Phoenix comparison scares me as, like Phoenix of yore, they went into the offseason with specific needs and addressed their primary areas of strength anyway.

fufofly · Post #54 » by **fufofly** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 10:46 pm

Masterfully wrote:Jazz easily.

Trouble staying healthy. Weakest where they need to be strongest (in the backcourt.) Stiff competition.

I could see them finishing around 32-33 wins.

As a Jazz fan, I also think Jazz are getting overhyped. I don't see us winning 50-51 games. But 32-33 wins??? Are you serious?

Just Look at those western conf teams. Super hyper healthy blazers who won 44 games last season.
Mavericks
Rockets
Injury Prone, old Grizzlies
Pelicans
Thunder

How can the Jazz lose that many games? They won 40 with their starting 5 missing about 180 games combined. Portland won 44 with 0 injuries. Did portland get better? Did houston get better? Did dallas get better?

DaddyCool19 · Post #55 » by **DaddyCool19** » Sat Aug 20, 2016 11:49 pm

Teams: Spurs, Celtics and Portland. The first 2 will still easily make the playoffs. Portland should also make it but not as a higher seed.

Players: Turner, Barnes and Rondo. The first 2 wont show enough to make their contracts seem decent and Rondo seems like a pretty bad fit.

Hero · Post #56 » by **Hero** » Mon Aug 22, 2016 2:09 am

FirePjax wrote:
Wolf_Cry wrote:If I was a betting man, I would go with the Wolves. Trust me, the basketball gods will curse us with with a couple of season injuries, make Thibs lose the rest of his hair, and make Glenn Taylor wish he had sold the franchise when he had a chance.

Thibs sercures the wolves will be competative imo

When has This ever underperformed. I'm sure the Wolves will do well once healthy.

Cappy_Smurf · Post #57 » by **Cappy_Smurf** » Mon Aug 22, 2016 4:50 am

zeebneeb wrote:
Masterfully wrote:Jazz easily.

Trouble staying healthy. Weakest where they need to be strongest (in the backcourt.) Stiff competition.

I could see them finishing around 32-33 wins.

This is not a team that was great and then had injuries. This is a team that has done exactly nothing and folks expect 50-60 wins somehow. Are injuries a factor? Of course and it would be disingenuous to state otherwise, but let's see how they actually perform at full strength before putting them into the top 5 teams, or in the semi-finals, or wcf against the Warriors right?

It's like they are everyone's for sure pick when there is nothing supporting it.

Baffling.

After Utah traded Kanter, they were one of the best teams in the league for half a season, beating up on teams with an historically good defense, and that included some of the best teams in the league. Then they got hammered by injuries. So in other words, your post is not in the least bit accurate. There is a reason why so many sports writers are predicting Utah to be that good, because unlike you, they were paying attention to where the team was at before the injuries. Not baffling at all.

Gus McCrae · Post #58 » by **Gus McCrae** » Mon Aug 22, 2016 5:04 am

I'll go Celtics and Blazers. I also think the Jazz have the personnel to be a top #4 team in the west but could see them getting the #7 or #8 seed which would be underperforming to me.

baldur · Post #59 » by **baldur** » Mon Aug 22, 2016 5:20 am

Masterfully wrote:Jazz easily.

Trouble staying healthy. Weakest where they need to be strongest (in the backcourt.) Stiff competition.

I could see them finishing around 32-33 wins.

you just killed them, man.

baldur · Post #60 » by **baldur** » Mon Aug 22, 2016 5:23 am

blind prophet wrote:
Froob wrote:Milwaukee and Orlando probably. They seemed to get hyped up every year. Coaching may have held Orlando back, guess we'll see.

You think the Bucks get hyped up?

you are right. people learnt the lesson from last year's disappointment. i remember very well bucks were projected as either 5th or 6th in the east during the off season.