How do the Jazz stack up against WC Contenders?

[KqWIN]

I feel like 1-7 in the West will actually have more to do with luck and load management then actual quality. By the end of the year, all these teams will be trying to tank into better matchups.

[Crunch 99]

Read on Twitter

[KqWIN]

That's a high number. Somehow 53 wins seems like a LOT more than 50 wins.

[stitches]

For whatever it's worth, David Griffin was on Howard Beck's podcast this week and was very effusive in his praise to the roster the Jazz have built. I can't remember the exact wording but when talking about where the Pelicans stack up against other Western conference teams and the value of having winning culture he separated the Clippers and the Jazz specifically by saying they both have tremendous rosters and the Pels can't compete with them. He said he he doesn't think NOP are better than the rest of the teams but he thinks they can compete against every other team in the West.

[KqWIN]

Read on Twitter

[Daddy 801]

Read on Twitter

Crazy to think we would be second and the path to the Finals would be Portland, Warriors/Lakers, Clippers. Then we would have to face Philly/Bucks.

I don’t think the NBA has ever had more competitive teams and amazing players.

[Crunch 99]

The Jazz Don't Need to Be a Superteam
https://www.si.com/nba/2019/07/26/jazz-donovan-mitchell-mike-conley-rudy-gobert-nba-free-agency

[DelaneyRudd]

I feel like 1-7 in the West will actually have more to do with luck and load management then actual quality. By the end of the year, all these teams will be trying to tank into better matchups.

I don’t think any particular team will illicit such behavior. Last year it made sense, and perhaps into the regular season you might find that certain teams from LA might load manage to lower seeds and have far superior metrics full strength. I feel like for Lakers and Rockets a first round exit would mean career changes for those with any say in the tank game.

[50CalClips]

Are the Clippers even close to being better than the Raptors? Sure PG is an upgrade over Siakim but every other spot on the floor and bench is a downgrade.

That's a good question, I'm not sure. What made the Raptors so good was that they could play 5 guys on the court who could all shoot, pass, and defend. It helped Kawhi get out of those double teams where he's not the greatest passer. The Clippers have a lot more one way players.

Think PG will have to turn another MVP level season to make it even with how good the Raps were last season.

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact).

The Clippers IMPROVED after trading away Tobais Harris --the "best player" on the team-- for what turned out to be Landry Shamet and Ivica Zubac.

30-25 record (.545) BEFORE trading away Tobias Harris*... which extrapolates to a 45-Win season
18-8 record (.692) AFTER adding Shamet and Zubac*... which extrapolates to a 57-Win season

Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.



*0-1 record in the transition/without Tobais or Shamet/Zubac

[KqWIN]

Are the Clippers even close to being better than the Raptors? Sure PG is an upgrade over Siakim but every other spot on the floor and bench is a downgrade.

That's a good question, I'm not sure. What made the Raptors so good was that they could play 5 guys on the court who could all shoot, pass, and defend. It helped Kawhi get out of those double teams where he's not the greatest passer. The Clippers have a lot more one way players.

Think PG will have to turn another MVP level season to make it even with how good the Raps were last season.

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact).

The Clippers IMPROVED after trading away Tobais Harris --the "best player" on the team-- for what turned out to be Landry Shamet and Ivica Zubac.

30-25 record (.545) BEFORE trading away Tobias Harris*... which extrapolates to a 45-Win season
18-8 record (.692) AFTER adding Shamet and Zubac*... which extrapolates to a 57-Win season

Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.



*0-1 record in the transition/without Tobais or Shamet/Zubac

Small samples of records, especially in the second half of the season, don't reflect the true strength of the team. Believe me, Jazz fans know that more than anyone else. Record in itself isn't the best indicator of the true strength of a team, so you're heavily extrapolating on top of something that isn't solid to begin with.

I'm sorry, but this heavy extrapolation (which you asserted yourself) is fairly useless. That's what it's worth.

[50CalClips]

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact).

The Clippers IMPROVED after trading away Tobais Harris --the "best player" on the team-- for what turned out to be Landry Shamet and Ivica Zubac.

30-25 record (.545) BEFORE trading away Tobias Harris*... which extrapolates to a 45-Win season
18-8 record (.692) AFTER adding Shamet and Zubac*... which extrapolates to a 57-Win season

Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.

*0-1 record in the transition/without Tobais or Shamet/Zubac

Small samples of records, especially in the second half of the season, don't reflect the true strength of the team. Believe me, Jazz fans know that more than anyone else. Record in itself isn't the best indicator of the true strength of a team, so you're heavily extrapolating on top of something that isn't solid to begin with.

I'm sorry, but this heavy extrapolation (which you asserted yourself) is fairly useless. That's what it's worth.

Eh, that's almost a third of the season. It's something. It's at least a bit better perspective to base things on.

Also, I forgot to mention JaMychal Green was acquired too...so it was 3 new Starters... 60% different Starting Line-up.

Watch on YouTube

[KqWIN]

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact).

The Clippers IMPROVED after trading away Tobais Harris --the "best player" on the team-- for what turned out to be Landry Shamet and Ivica Zubac.

30-25 record (.545) BEFORE trading away Tobias Harris*... which extrapolates to a 45-Win season
18-8 record (.692) AFTER adding Shamet and Zubac*... which extrapolates to a 57-Win season

Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.

*0-1 record in the transition/without Tobais or Shamet/Zubac

Small samples of records, especially in the second half of the season, don't reflect the true strength of the team. Believe me, Jazz fans know that more than anyone else. Record in itself isn't the best indicator of the true strength of a team, so you're heavily extrapolating on top of something that isn't solid to begin with.

I'm sorry, but this heavy extrapolation (which you asserted yourself) is fairly useless. That's what it's worth.

Eh, that's almost a third of the season. It's something. It's at least a bit better perspective to base things on.

Also, I forgot to mention JaMychal Green was acquired too... so it was 3 new Starters... 60% different Starting Line-up.

Watch on YouTube

It's 26 games. The Jazz have had incredible 44 games stretches and it doesn't matter. Even if you take the 26 games as a large enough sample size. They played more like a 48 win team than a 57 win team. Point differential is a stronger indication of team strength than record.

[50CalClips]

Eh, that's almost a third of the season. It's something. It's at least a bit better perspective to base things on.

Also, I forgot to mention JaMychal Green was acquired too... so it was 3 new Starters... 60% different Starting Line-up...

It's 26 games. The Jazz have had incredible 44 games stretches and it doesn't matter. Even if you take the 26 games as a large enough sample size. They played more like a 48 win team than a 57 win team. Point differential is a stronger indication of team strength than record.

But it's not just some random "stretch" of games... it's the appropriate version of the Clippers line-up which we have to work with.

Clippers, after Feb 7, 2019:
New Starting SG = Landry Shamet (deadly sharpshooter)
New Starting PF = JaMychal Green (stretch-4, rebounder)
New Starting C = Ivica Zubac (capable big)

[KqWIN]

Eh, that's almost a third of the season. It's something. It's at least a bit better perspective to base things on.

Also, I forgot to mention JaMychal Green was acquired too... so it was 3 new Starters... 60% different Starting Line-up...

It's 26 games. The Jazz have had incredible 44 games stretches and it doesn't matter. Even if you take the 26 games as a large enough sample size. They played more like a 48 win team than a 57 win team. Point differential is a stronger indication of team strength than record.

But it's not just some random "stretch" of games... it's the appropriate version of the Clippers line-up which we have to work with.

Clippers, after Feb 7, 2019:
New Starting SG = Landry Shamet (deadly sharpshooter)
New Starting PF = JaMychal Green (stretch-4, rebounder)
New Starting C = Ivica Zubac (capable big)

It's 26 games. Randomness happens in 26 games. I'm sorry, but this is inarguable. Small sample sizes are small sample sizes. If you actually believe the Clippers were a 57 win team, be my guest. You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". Well to me, it's worth very little. The reason why it's worth very little is because it's an absolute fact that 26 sample sizes are incredibly variable on top of the point differential thing that I've already mentioned. It's an enormous stretch. If those are the extrapolations and reaches you believe in, there is no reason to discuss.

[50CalClips]

But it's not just some random "stretch" of games... it's the appropriate version of the Clippers line-up which we have to work with.

Clippers, after Feb 7, 2019:
New Starting SG = Landry Shamet (deadly sharpshooter)
New Starting PF = JaMychal Green (stretch-4, rebounder)
New Starting C = Ivica Zubac (capable big)

It's 26 games. Randomness happens in 26 games. I'm sorry, but this is inarguable. Small sample sizes are small sample sizes. If you actually believe the Clippers were a 57 win team, be my guest. You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". Well to me, it's worth very little. The reason why it's worth very little is because it's an absolute fact that 26 sample sizes are incredibly variable on top of the point differential thing that I've already mentioned. It's an enormous stretch. If those are the extrapolations and reaches you believe in, there is no reason to discuss.

It's the portion of the season (31% of it) that is most relevant to anything having to do with assessing the 2020 Clippers team.

Two Thirds of the season: 30-25
Tobias Harris (Str PF), Avery Bradley (Str PG), Marcin Gortat (Str C)... Boban, Milos, Scott

One Third of the season: 18-8
Landry Shamet (Str SG), Ivica Zubac (Str C), JaMychal Green (Str PF)... Temple, Chandler

As I said in the my very first reply in this post-thread...

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact)... Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.

[KqWIN]

But it's not just some random "stretch" of games... it's the appropriate version of the Clippers line-up which we have to work with.

Clippers, after Feb 7, 2019:
New Starting SG = Landry Shamet (deadly sharpshooter)
New Starting PF = JaMychal Green (stretch-4, rebounder)
New Starting C = Ivica Zubac (capable big)

It's 26 games. Randomness happens in 26 games. I'm sorry, but this is inarguable. Small sample sizes are small sample sizes. If you actually believe the Clippers were a 57 win team, be my guest. You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". Well to me, it's worth very little. The reason why it's worth very little is because it's an absolute fact that 26 sample sizes are incredibly variable on top of the point differential thing that I've already mentioned. It's an enormous stretch. If those are the extrapolations and reaches you believe in, there is no reason to discuss.

It's the portion of the season (31% of it) that is most relevant to anything having to do with assessing the 2020 Clippers team.

Two Thirds of the season: 30-25
Tobias Harris (Str PF), Avery Bradley (Str PG), Marcin Gortat (Str C)... Boban, Milos, Scott

One Third of the season: 18-8
Landry Shamet (Str SG), Ivica Zubac (Str C), JaMychal Green (Str PF)... Temple, Chandler

As I said in the my very first reply in this post-thread...

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact)... Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.

You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". It's worth very little. The statement that the final Clippers roster had a 57-WIN caliber roster is ridiculous in any capacity. I've stated the reasons why, which you've largely ignored, but that's kind of my point. If you come into a discussion starting off with that, you're probably not looking for a discussion at all and if you are it's not one worth having. Why even bring something up if you know it's not worth anything in the first place. Nobody believes in that statement.

[dr0welf]

It's 26 games. Randomness happens in 26 games. I'm sorry, but this is inarguable. Small sample sizes are small sample sizes. If you actually believe the Clippers were a 57 win team, be my guest. You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". Well to me, it's worth very little. The reason why it's worth very little is because it's an absolute fact that 26 sample sizes are incredibly variable on top of the point differential thing that I've already mentioned. It's an enormous stretch. If those are the extrapolations and reaches you believe in, there is no reason to discuss.

It's the portion of the season (31% of it) that is most relevant to anything having to do with assessing the 2020 Clippers team.

Two Thirds of the season: 30-25
Tobias Harris (Str PF), Avery Bradley (Str PG), Marcin Gortat (Str C)... Boban, Milos, Scott

One Third of the season: 18-8
Landry Shamet (Str SG), Ivica Zubac (Str C), JaMychal Green (Str PF)... Temple, Chandler

As I said in the my very first reply in this post-thread...

The final version of the 2019 Clippers had a 57-WIN caliber roster, arguably/technically/hypothetically (I'm not actually making that claim, but just bringing up a fact)... Those simplistic stats don't tell the whole story, but those are the Win-Loss records, before and after... for what it's worth.

You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". It's worth very little. The statement that the final Clippers roster had a 57-WIN caliber roster is ridiculous in any capacity. I've stated the reasons why, which you've largely ignored, but that's kind of my point. If you come into a discussion starting off with that, you're probably not looking for a discussion at all and if you are it's not one worth having. Why even bring something up if you know it's not worth anything in the first place. Nobody believes in that statement.

I would question what the SOS was in the different breakdowns you post. How many were against teams missing major parts, etc. Like KqWin, I too think theirs too many variables within such a small sample size that it really doesn't mean much. It's definitely a feel good stat at this moment. Plus the fact your two biggest players with probably the most usage coming up changes the flow of the team, so it really states nothing what you did before without them.

[50CalClips]

You said it yourself, "for what it's worth". It's worth very little. The statement that the final Clippers roster had a 57-WIN caliber roster is ridiculous in any capacity. I've stated the reasons why, which you've largely ignored, but that's kind of my point. If you come into a discussion starting off with that, you're probably not looking for a discussion at all and if you are it's not one worth having. Why even bring something up if you know it's not worth anything in the first place. Nobody believes in that statement.

Whatever those stats are worth, they're worth more than basing things off of less pertinent stats (the Clippers stats before the trade).

The "57-Wins" thing serves as an eye-opener. For those that didn't know, hadn't thought to look into it... the Clippers of the first part of the season were not the same as the Clippers of the later part of the season.

"57-Wins" just happens to be what the new version-Clippers' Win-Loss record extrapolated to. It's noteworthy. And it's easier to conceptualize than simply listing win percentage of .692 in 26 games compared to .545 in 55 games. (btw, of those 26 games, 12 teams were Playoffs team, 14 weren't; 12 were Road Games, 14 were Home; so not too loop-sided)

Point being, we should assess the Clippers based on who they were to end the season, not who they were at the beginning of the season.

[dr0welf]

^Whatever those stats are worth, they're worth more than basing things off of less pertinent stats (the Clippers stats before the trade).

The "57-Wins" thing serves as an eye-opener. For those that didn't know, hadn't thought to look into it... the Clippers of the first part of the season were not the same as the Clippers of the later part of the season.

"57-Wins" just happens to be what the new version-Clippers' Win-Loss record extrapolated to. It's noteworthy. And it's easier to conceptualize than simply listing win percentage of .692 in 26 games compared to .545 in 55 games. (btw, of those 26 games, 12 teams were Playoffs team, 14 weren't; 12 were Road Games, 14 were Home; so not too loop-sided)

Point being, we should assess the Clippers based on who they were to end the season, not who they were at the beginning of the season.

Look the Clippers had a great ending to last year. Way better then the way they started the year. I don't think anyone here is unaware of how good of team you have now compared to last year. We are just saying that you can't say it's a 57 win team based off end of the year stats. Add in two pieces, that will be your top 2, pieces onto that team and I hear the implication that you will only go up from 57. How many more wins does PG and Kawhi get you?

Thier are too many variables here that don't work and a lot more teams this year that can win any given night. It's flawed and I don't know if your Clips (or anyteam for that matter) will get the 60 mark this year. And honestly Kawhi + PG additions are worth more then 3 more wins. But since all factors are not equal the comparisons mean little.

[50CalClips]

I would question what the SOS was in the different breakdowns you post. How many were against teams missing major parts, etc. Like KqWin, I too think theirs too many variables within such a small sample size that it really doesn't mean much. It's definitely a feel good stat at this moment. Plus the fact your two biggest players with probably the most usage coming up changes the flow of the team, so it really states nothing what you did before without them.

Ha. Okay.