Author Topic: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?  (Read 12487 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #60 on: July 27, 2016, 01:26:20 AM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
On a somewhat unrelated note, I like how we call Thad an average starter because he puts up good numbers on a desperate bad team. But when a guy like Jordan clarkson in LA does the same thing, he's called a "good stats on a bad team guy" who wouldn't thrive elsewhere. It's one or the other, guys (though I admit to doing this as well).
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #61 on: July 27, 2016, 01:58:44 AM »

Offline byennie

  • Webmaster
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2572
  • Tommy Points: 3033
On a somewhat unrelated note, I like how we call Thad an average starter because he puts up good numbers on a desperate bad team. But when a guy like Jordan clarkson in LA does the same thing, he's called a "good stats on a bad team guy" who wouldn't thrive elsewhere. It's one or the other, guys (though I admit to doing this as well).

It's a valid point, but worth noting that Thad Young has been roughly the same player for 10 years, 5 of which included significant roles for playoff teams. Clarkson could end up doing the same, but he's the one of the two that's only played for garbage teams.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #62 on: July 27, 2016, 02:06:31 AM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
Thad young is a bum

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #63 on: July 27, 2016, 02:06:37 AM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
On a somewhat unrelated note, I like how we call Thad an average starter because he puts up good numbers on a desperate bad team. But when a guy like Jordan clarkson in LA does the same thing, he's called a "good stats on a bad team guy" who wouldn't thrive elsewhere. It's one or the other, guys (though I admit to doing this as well).

It's a valid point, but worth noting that Thad Young has been roughly the same player for 10 years, 5 of which included significant roles for playoff teams. Clarkson could end up doing the same, but he's the one of the two that's only played for garbage teams.

Yeah that's a point I hadn't considered. Good point.
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #64 on: July 27, 2016, 02:31:31 AM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15739
  • Tommy Points: 1386
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #65 on: July 27, 2016, 06:10:15 PM »

Offline RAAAAAAAANDY

  • NCE
  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 995
  • Tommy Points: 57
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #66 on: July 27, 2016, 07:03:47 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15739
  • Tommy Points: 1386
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

That is not how it works actually. They are projected to win 18. By comparison here are the other teams of note
76ers 23.5
Bulls 46.5
Pacers 47
Knicks 43
Lakers 29

Some teams are still not listed, including the Celtics. However, the Nets are a pretty heavy favorite as of now to finish with the worst record in the league by a comfortable margin. Randy, if you really feel as comfortable with this as you seem to say, go place a pretty sizable bet on this in Vegas.  You can fly out there any time before the season stats and the number should be around there barring some crazy trade or offseason injury. If you did do that, and it was big, I would actually root for your bet.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #67 on: July 27, 2016, 08:17:18 PM »

Offline SCeltic34

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16005
  • Tommy Points: 1956
Without Lopez, the Nets probably win about 13 games, 15-16 at an absolute maximum.   He was the only reason the Nets weren't a 15-win team last year.  The quality of the Nets play was very dramatic.  Whenever Lopez wasn't on the court, the Nets would basically fall apart.  But since the eye test isn't sufficient evidence, have a look at the on-off numbers.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lopezbr01/on-off/2016/

Too lazy to type the numbers in.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #68 on: July 27, 2016, 09:00:09 PM »

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7482
  • Tommy Points: 943
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

Prices in injury?
Your last line sounds like something Larbrd would say when he's been proven wrong repeatedly but is too crazy to let his imaginary level of self declared expertise concede that he is actually way off...ala the Nets thread last year (or any LarBrd33 thread where he ignores every reasonable argument/counterpoint and repeats himself acting as if people aren't reading his writing properly because he simply can't come up with a reply).
That's not you, and i apppreciate you're acknowledging the debate, but on this one you're simply overrating their chances at a possible 25 wins when the rest of the world says they'll stink even more than last year.
God help them if Lopez goes down.

"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #69 on: July 27, 2016, 09:09:27 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15739
  • Tommy Points: 1386
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

Prices in injury?
Your last line sounds like something Larbrd would say when he's been proven wrong repeatedly but is too crazy to let his imaginary level of self declared expertise concede that he is actually way off...ala the Nets thread last year (or any LarBrd33 thread where he ignores every reasonable argument/counterpoint and repeats himself acting as if people aren't reading his writing properly because he simply can't come up with a reply).
That's not you, and i apppreciate you're acknowledging the debate, but on this one you're simply overrating their chances at a possible 25 wins when the rest of the world says they'll stink even more than last year.
God help them if Lopez goes down.

Haha yes I would agree with all of this. They are projected to have the talent to win 16-19 games barring nothing unusual happening. No other way to spin it.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2016, 09:25:20 PM by celticsclay »

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #70 on: July 27, 2016, 10:26:35 PM »

Offline RAAAAAAAANDY

  • NCE
  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 995
  • Tommy Points: 57
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

That is not how it works actually. They are projected to win 18. By comparison here are the other teams of note
76ers 23.5
Bulls 46.5
Pacers 47
Knicks 43
Lakers 29

Some teams are still not listed, including the Celtics. However, the Nets are a pretty heavy favorite as of now to finish with the worst record in the league by a comfortable margin. Randy, if you really feel as comfortable with this as you seem to say, go place a pretty sizable bet on this in Vegas.  You can fly out there any time before the season stats and the number should be around there barring some crazy trade or offseason injury. If you did do that, and it was big, I would actually root for your bet.

That's exactly how it works. 18 is O/U, bettors think if things break will they'll go over, if they don't they'll go under.

I am not betting on the Nets, I think they stink. But the worst team typically wins about 15-16 games... I'm saying w/o Brook they'd win 16-18. Which apparently is"crazy" despite the fact that they have no incentive to tank w/o picks, for which is bump them up 1-2 games.

But I think they'll be less of a disaster, and maybe that doesn't translate to many more wins, but that team was a toxic mess last year. Run by an idiot, coached by an idiot, and hit somewhat hard by injuries. We'll see.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #71 on: July 27, 2016, 10:33:08 PM »

Offline RAAAAAAAANDY

  • NCE
  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 995
  • Tommy Points: 57
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

Prices in injury?

That's not you, and i apppreciate you're acknowledging the debate, but on this one you're simply overrating their chances at a possible 25 wins when the rest of the world says they'll stink even more than last year.


Yes... If you guaranteed all of their players would stay healthy all year do you think that would not go up? It's not that hard to figure out buddy.

As far as overrating their chances when the "rest of the world" which apparently encapsulates biased Celtics fans thinks there is no chance, let's take a look at last year:

Celtics: +5.5 from O/U
Golden State: +12.5
Denver: +6.5

Heck, Vegas thought Portland was going to win 26.5 games last year.

But yeah, those are totally set in stone.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #72 on: July 27, 2016, 10:40:28 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

Prices in injury?

That's not you, and i apppreciate you're acknowledging the debate, but on this one you're simply overrating their chances at a possible 25 wins when the rest of the world says they'll stink even more than last year.


Yes... If you guaranteed all of their players would stay healthy all year do you think that would not go up? It's not that hard to figure out buddy.

As far as overrating their chances when the "rest of the world" which apparently encapsulates biased Celtics fans thinks there is no chance, let's take a look at last year:

Celtics: +5.5 from O/U
Golden State: +12.5
Denver: +6.5

Heck, Vegas thought Portland was going to win 26.5 games last year.

But yeah, those are totally set in stone.
Nets have the worst odds everywhere. Ive literally yet to find a prediction of any sort that has them coming in better than tied for dead last.

Now I wont claim to have found them all, but point is its not Celtics homerism to say this team is trash.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #73 on: July 28, 2016, 12:40:22 AM »

Offline trickybilly

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5593
  • Tommy Points: 617
"Gimme the ball, gimme the ball". Freddy Quimby, 1994.

Re: If Brook Lopez were out for 2016-17, how many games do the Nets win?
« Reply #74 on: July 28, 2016, 01:43:40 AM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15739
  • Tommy Points: 1386
16-18, Scola could hold down the fort and if they simply thing with that Kid McCullough he could be a bouncy 5 who can get out and run.

They'll actually have guards this year too.
They might not win that WITH Lopez.
please explain to me how that team got 5 games worse this offseason. Delusional.
Lol. Still confident after nobody in this entire thread agrees with you? Ill put money down that the Nets don't win 18 games, and I don't care who gets hurt. Put your money where your mouth is, pal.

The difference of course being that they're enormously biased, and I'm not. They won 21 last year with the worst coach not named Byron Scott, nothing at PG and their only wing defender injured.
If we are all "enormously biased" because we're Celtics fans, then why aren't you biased? If you're not a Celtics fan, then get out of this forum and head on over to a Nets one.

On this point, is Vegas somehow enormously biased too?

Has Vegas even set over-unders for W/L? The offseason isn't even over, so I don't think they're biased. I think they're insane if they're predicting records for rosters that aren't finalized yet.
yes they have the nets are at 17.5

Which prices in injury possibility...

So talent wise 20-25 if healthy, which I agree with.

Prices in injury?

That's not you, and i apppreciate you're acknowledging the debate, but on this one you're simply overrating their chances at a possible 25 wins when the rest of the world says they'll stink even more than last year.


Yes... If you guaranteed all of their players would stay healthy all year do you think that would not go up? It's not that hard to figure out buddy.

As far as overrating their chances when the "rest of the world" which apparently encapsulates biased Celtics fans thinks there is no chance, let's take a look at last year:

Celtics: +5.5 from O/U
Golden State: +12.5
Denver: +6.5

Heck, Vegas thought Portland was going to win 26.5 games last year.

But yeah, those are totally set in stone.
I appreciate your insight on the 76ers and think you are usually level headed (even about them), but your verging on just embarassing yourself here. Are Vegas lines always correct? Obviously not or there wouldn't be billions of dollars spent every year trying to beat it. However, there are very smart people setting these lines so it does take something unusual for them to beat. Now if last year you said I think the Blazers  bought low on plumlee and he is a starting caliber NBA center, I think McCollum is actually a star, aminu is an excellent 3 point shooter that will exceed his past production and collectively I think this means they are undervalued by about 15 wins, well then I would respect your viewpoint and probably make bets on what you said this year. That being said, it does take something being undervalued for one of these teams wildly exceeding their projection. What makes you think the Nets will? Obviously Lin and Lopez are far enougb along in their careers that they don't really have a chance of wildly exceeding projections. So who does... Obviously not randy foye, Trevor booker or Louis Scolla. Maybe rhj? I mean it's a real tough argument to come up with