2021-22 NBA Season Discussion

[letskissbro]

The Warriors held up very well without Steph this season

Read on Twitter

[feyki]

Conley declined, I would say Jazz would beat us comfortably if Jazz are last year Jazz. But after Suns and Grizzs, Jazz are the biggest threat for us in the West. It's bad to faced Jazz instead of Nuggets.

My MVP ranking:
Tier 1 - Clear MVP, Led Avr to 1th Seed;
Jokic - +6,0 SRS added(Nuggets -3,7 SRS w/out Jokic), 23 wins added(25W Nuggets)
Yannis - +5,4 SRS added(Bucks -2,2 SRS w/out), 20,5 wins added(30W Bucks)
Embiid - +4,9 SRS added(Sixers -2,3 SRS w/out), 19,5 wins added(31W Sixers)
,

Tier 2 - Weak MVP, Led Avr to HCA;
Curry - +4,6 SRS added(Warriors +0,9 SRS w/out), 16 wins added(42W Warriors)
Doncic - +4,6 SRS added(Mavs -1,5 SRS w/out), 16 wins added(37W Mavs)
Derozan - +4,3 SRS added(Bulls -4,7 SRS w/out), 15,5 wins added(29W Bulls)
Tatum - +4,2 SRS added(Celt +2,8 SRS w/out), 15 wins added(48W Celt, Celtics have 62 wins projection with their SRS)
Durant - +4,2 SRS added(Nets -3,4 SRS w/out), 13,5 wins added(31W Nets)
Lebron - +4,1 SRS added(LA -7,2 SRS w/out), 13 wins added(19W LA)
Harden - +3,9 SRS added and 13 wins added

. Also have tier 3 as gets at least one vote players, but don't want to go further.

[ardee]

The Celtics finish the season with the highest SRS in the league (7.02), the Suns dropped to 6.94. Wow.

The Suns have 13 more wins. I wonder what this kind of discrepancy between record and SRS says about both teams.

[eminence]

The Warriors held up very well without Steph this season

Read on Twitter

Not so much. That particular sample is very dependent on that 4 game final stretch where they played the Kings/Lakers/Spurs/Pelicans all down most of their starters and went 4-0 with an avg MOV of 15.5. Not exactly murderers row.

Prior to that they were 4-10 without him with an avg MOV of -5.9.

(no, I can't be bothered to run the SRS matrix for this)

[Colbinii]

The Celtics finish the season with the highest SRS in the league (7.02), the Suns dropped to 6.94. Wow.

The Suns have 13 more wins. I wonder what this kind of discrepancy between record and SRS says about both teams.

I don't think we can exactly draw conclusions solely from W-L and SRS but we have other data points which help visualize each team.

Phoenix Suns

-All-time great in the clutch team.

Phoenix was 33-9 [.786%] in the clutch this season.

Boston was 13-22 [.371%] in the clutch this season.

Previous NBA Champions in the clutch
2021 Bucks .464%
2020 Lakers .667%
2019 Raptors .606%
2018 Warriors .655%
2017 Warriors .640%
2016 Cavaliers .576%

[feyki]

Without Robert Williams Celtics record - 11W/10L. Don't think Celt can beat Nets without him.

[sp6r=underrated]

Not denying that the Cowboys are popular, they very obviously are. Just saying that the Lakers/Yankees comparisons don't really work because they've been nowhere near as successful or dominant over their sport.

The NFL is weird in that their closest analogue to the Lakers/Celtics/Yankees/Habs is located in tiny Green Bay and is community-owned, so Jeff Bezos can't really wake up one morning and decide to buy the Packers and move them to San Diego. I'd imagine this all puts a hard cap on their value compared to the other sports' historic dynasties (Forbes only ranks them 13th), which amplifies the effects of other factors like the Cowboys' merchandise deal or the Patriots' recent success.

The NFL doesn't have an on-field equivalent to the Yankees/Lakers or what the Canadiens were to the NHL up until 1993. You can make the argument for several franchises.

There are a lot of reasons for it but the biggest is the fundamentals of the game and the business.

The business of the NFL is unlike the other North American sports leagues, revenue is overwhelming generated at the national level which dilutes the importance of markets. There are no local TV deals. Every game basically sells out and there aren't many home games so ticket sale differences aren't substantial in revenue. This is way different than the NBA were a substantial amount of revenue is local and totally different than MLB were most revenue is local.

A lot of people hate this but there is no solution. There is no way to effectively nationalize this revenue. Moving to all national TV deals is only viable with dramatic reductions in the number of games. Given basketball's relative popularity this is a money loser.

The NFL roster is enormous in comparison to other sports. The small number of games and single elimination tournament also adds significant randomness year to year. The shorter season, 2-3 months less than the other leagues, also makes playing in the hinterlands more tolerable. Living in Buffalo would be a much harder sell with an extra 2 months in the city.

All of these factors dilute the ability of one franchise to move far ahead on the field. They are also far more important than the hard cap. The hard cap mainly allows the owners to steal more money from the players. I wouldn't consider the hard cap a major factor at all in NFL's franchise balance.

As an aside, the NFL's twenty year decision to tailor rules to preserve QBs will make forming dynasties easier and shift power to QBs in their dealings with management. It will never be like the NBA but it will be different. Watson is the canary in the coal mine.

But on the popularity end Cowboys are the most popular franchise by almost all metrics.

I don't think this last sentence has much to do with the rest of your post. I also don't think it's correct.

How do you define popularity, and what are the metrics that support that? Based on the popularity of basketball world wide, social media,the fame of individual basketball players and merchandise sales - I find it highly unlikely that the Cowboys are anywhere near as more popular than the Lakers. I don't think there is any sports franchises outside of 5-10 soccer teams that are more recognizable or in some way supported than the Lakers.

People wear Yankees hats in places that do not even know how baseball is played (which is like 97% of the world), their brand is much more recognizable than the Cowboys....which isn't recognizable at all really outside of USA and to an extent Canada.

In fact, I would argue that even in big cities, like NYC no one would give a crap about the Cowboys. I can't picture anyone in New York in some way supporting Tony Romo or having any type of positivity said toward the Cowboys, in a city with 20 million people I have never observed that even once. The same is not said about the Lakers, where plenty of people are fans of the Lakers in New York or at least follow them, or buy their merchandise, or might be rooting for them. Again, I'm not sure how we are defining popularity, but in many places I see the Cowboys more as hated or indifferent.

New York for example is not USA, but then again USA isn't the world. Like I said, the Cowboys are not really the equivalent of the Lakers or the Yankees. The gap in reach between the Lakers and all the other franchises is significantly bigger than the gap between the Cowboys and all the other franchises. The Lakers and Yankees by far the biggest iconic franchises in their sports, which have more reach than the NFL does - the Cowboys are the most iconic in the NFL franchise but not by a lot.


Even within USA, if we go down to key demographics, which are essentially Males under 40 years old being the most valuable one, the Dallas Cowboys are not particularly popular if I can recall. Which makes a lot of sense, because like, why would they be? Why would a 26 year old from Buffalo or Detroit care about Troy Aikman? They'd have plenty of reason to like Kobe Bryant or wear Yankee hats.

The Dallas Cowboys popularity is highly a generational thing. The Lakers and Yankees have been relevant across more generations, and it will take their fandom much longer to die out.



It is true that the Cowboys are on big American talk shows, people talking about why they suck and stuff - but that's true of the Knicks as well. The Knicks also are worth more than the Lakers, but it'd be weird to say the Knicks are more popular than the Lakers.

Heck, Washington gets talked about all the time and I can't even remember the last time they were good. Not to the extent of the Cowboys, but they've been even crappier than the Cowboys - but again their fan base outside of their region is aging as well. The same thing will/is happening to Dallas, I don't think enough people are going to "inherit" their Dad's sports team to keep the Cowboy's legacy outside of its region highly relevant.


Don't mean to come off as hostile, I'm just thinking about it, and I really think the Cowboys are an actual sinking ship. It's easy to say the most popular franchise in the most popular American sport >>> everything, but their visibility for me anecdotally is not that high. The topic interest me - defining teams popularity across different sports.

I was strictly talking US as the NFL is basically a domestic league. I assumed that was understood. If you're talking global I don't even know how this isn't simply soccer clubs.

And yes they are much more popular in the US than the Lakers because way more people care about football than basketball. 37 million people watched them play on Thanksgiving 11 million more than the lions and twice as many as the 3rd games. 41 million watched their wild card game. Both were the highest number in years and both were due to the Cowboys.

As a frame of reference 28 millions watched Lakers Celtics/Game 7.

[sp6r=underrated]

Read on Twitter

It's like the Lakers were trying to fire Vogel in the most meanspirited way possible. Regardless of your opinions on Vogel's coaching, he at least seems like a nice guy and didn't deserve to be treated like this.

Yup, there is no reason to fire someone in this manner unless they engaged in severe misconduct or demonstrated severe incompetence. Neither is true for Vogel.

It is also quite shortsighted. Stuff like this gets noticed. Lakers management sent a clear message to coaches with the way they treated Vogel this year. When we win the organizational credit goes to the Buss family when we lose the organizational blame all goes to the head coach.

[Fadeaway_J]

Read on Twitter

It's like the Lakers were trying to fire Vogel in the most meanspirited way possible. Regardless of your opinions on Vogel's coaching, he at least seems like a nice guy and didn't deserve to be treated like this.

Yup, there is no reason to fire someone in this manner unless they engaged in severe misconduct or demonstrated severe incompetence. Neither is true for Vogel.

It is also quite shortsighted. Stuff like this gets noticed. Lakers management sent a clear message to coaches with the way they treated Vogel this year. When we win the organizational credit goes to the Buss family when we lose the organizational blame all goes to the head coach.

This is how they operate. Nothing matters to them except star power. Even the process of them ending up with Vogel in the first place was a complete clown show for that very reason.

[NinjaSheppard]

I am kinda conflicted on the Suns.

On one hand their point margin is kinda underwhelming for a 64 win team. On the other hand they are an all time great clutch team that can do whatever it wants it those situations and they have had some of the worst injury luck in the league this year in terms of games missed.

Their shot profile kinda sucks. Not many threes, free throws or rim attempts. On the other hand they are an all time restricted area but not the rim team and they have two all universe mid range shooters.

I really can't decide if those are good things or signs that they might not be as great. They remind me of the 2014 Spurs but also the 2007 Mavericks. Maybe just too much Chris Paul fan PTSD. I do trust that they have a coaching advantage on every team besides the Clippers though.

[sp6r=underrated]

Read on Twitter

It's like the Lakers were trying to fire Vogel in the most meanspirited way possible. Regardless of your opinions on Vogel's coaching, he at least seems like a nice guy and didn't deserve to be treated like this.

Yup, there is no reason to fire someone in this manner unless they engaged in severe misconduct or demonstrated severe incompetence. Neither is true for Vogel.

It is also quite shortsighted. Stuff like this gets noticed. Lakers management sent a clear message to coaches with the way they treated Vogel this year. When we win the organizational credit goes to the Buss family when we lose the organizational blame all goes to the head coach.

This is how they operate. Nothing matters to them except star power. Even the process of them ending up with Vogel in the first place was a complete clown show for that very reason.

I don't follow the Lakers enough to know the internal workings of the franchise. I will state Doc's point about Cooke being omitted from the franchise history seems telling. When I looked him up he seemed a very good owner and you basically never hear of him or his impact on the franchise.

Contrast that with Steinbrenner, the famous Yankees owner. He was a mercurial man who often times treated people grossly unfairly but he never pretended he built the brand from day one.

It is also short-sighted. the clear message the Lakers are sending out right now is that unless you are a Superstar the franchise views you as totally expendable. Superstars are the driving force of the NBA but the Danny Greens, Robert Horrys matter too. And the message the lakers say is if you come here you're playing for your next contract somewhere else because we view you as replaceable.

[parsnips33]

So we might get Nets Bucks rematch round 1? That should be fun

Also Memphis series against either Clippers or Minnesota will be a good one

[Doctor MJ]

The Warriors held up very well without Steph this season

Read on Twitter

Oh, I'd say that's too zoomed out of a perspective to be meaningful.

What I see with the Warriors is that they went through phases:

1. Started off on fire.
2. Slumped a bit as they got tired.
3. Slumped a bit more with injuries (Draymond especially)
4. Got momentum again.
5. Slumped a bit when Klay came back and disrupted everything.
6. Slumped more when Curry went out.
7. Finally found a groove without Curry to end the season - weak competition yes, but Klay looked good again.

Analytically, this adds up to a drastic difference between the success with Curry compared to all other players, but big picture what it says is that if everyone gets back in their groove and plays well together in the playoffs, they should be terrifying to play. Will that be where they are at? Dunno.

[parsnips33]

The Warriors held up very well without Steph this season

Read on Twitter

Oh, I'd say that's too zoomed out of a perspective to be meaningful.

What I see with the Warriors is that they went through phases:

1. Started off on fire.
2. Slumped a bit as they got tired.
3. Slumped a bit more with injuries (Draymond especially)
4. Got momentum again.
5. Slumped a bit when Klay came back and disrupted everything.
6. Slumped more when Curry went out.
7. Finally found a groove without Curry to end the season - weak competition yes, but Klay looked good again.

Analytically, this adds up to a drastic difference between the success with Curry compared to all other players, but big picture what it says is that if everyone gets back in their groove and plays well together in the playoffs, they should be terrifying to play. Will that be where they are at? Dunno.

Impressive Kerr has kept everybody engaged and the team still winning through all this. Also impressed with guys stepping up and sliding into different roles (Steph playing like more of a traditional PG/distributor with Dray out, Klay at least trying to inject more off the ball creation with Steph out, Poole dealing with a changing role all season and filling Steph's spot admirably, Looney being there through it all and holding the defense down through long stretches)

This season has note been without it's frustrations for Warriors fans, but it's been pretty cool to watch as a whole

Now to see if Warriors can knock out an MVP European big man in round 1

[NinjaSheppard]

The Warriors beat 4 teams to end the season that didn't play almost any of their rotation players in the Spurs, Lakers, Kings and Pelicans. Those aren't real basketball games

[falcolombardi]

So we might get Nets Bucks rematch round 1? That should be fun

Also Memphis series against either Clippers or Minnesota will be a good one

only in round 2 or conference finals

nets can finish 7 or 8 if they make the playoffs so they would play either miami or boston

[Statlanta]

There are more Warriors slumps than runs. Considering the team missed the playoffs last season I’m tending to believe they’ve overachieved even with the injuries. Especially considering how hard they try in the RS(2015/2016)

[parsnips33]

So we might get Nets Bucks rematch round 1? That should be fun

Also Memphis series against either Clippers or Minnesota will be a good one

only in round 2 or conference finals

nets can finish 7 or 8 if they make the playoffs so they would play either miami or boston

Oh Boston has the tiebreaker of Milwaukee then? basketball reference shows Milwaukee as number 2

[falcolombardi]

So we might get Nets Bucks rematch round 1? That should be fun

Also Memphis series against either Clippers or Minnesota will be a good one

only in round 2 or conference finals

nets can finish 7 or 8 if they make the playoffs so they would play either miami or boston

Oh Boston has the tiebreaker of Milwaukee then? basketball reference shows Milwaukee as number 2

they went 2-2 vs each other and both are división champions but boston has the better eastern conference record which is the next tiebreaker

[Texas Chuck]

Sorry for causing the derail bringing up teams from others sports in comparison with the Lakers. But important to note I didn't use the Cowboys to say they had the same level of success in their sport as the Lakers did, but rather to talk about life is different when you are one of these franchises. And it absolutely is relevant in that aspect. My point was in regards to team-building the Lakers don't have to play the same way the other 29 franchises do. Because they are the Los Angeles Lakers. And yes that still means something to enough players to matter.

This was not meant to discount the Clippers under Ballmer who deserve a lot of credit for establishing a lot of credibility to that franchise. But they aren't the Lakers and aren't likely to be. Even with the incompetence of the Buss kids. Just like Jerry Jones try as hard as it seems like he does to sabotage them, they are still the biggest deal in American sports and probably still will be in 10, 20, 50 years. NFL is king and they are the big boys. Lakers are the big boys here. And probably always will be.(obviously some lean years, but as we saw with Lebron, lean years didn't deter him one bit.)