Author Topic: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?  (Read 2933 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #60 on: November 13, 2017, 01:51:30 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23109
  • Tommy Points: 2843
Power rankings are dumb, subjective ways of measuring teams, but it's pretty ridiculous that they have Houston over us given our impressive streak with our injuries. I'm not too impressed with them, and I think our elite D would cause them problems and cause them to jack up even worse shots than they already take.

Ultimately, I think we're pretty clearly the second best team in the NBA right now. Can't wait until Thursday's game against GS. Hopefully everyone is healthy (besides Gordy) so that we can have a true measurement of where we are in the league. I think we matchup even better with them now than we did last year, and we should really thrive on turning them over and pushing the ball.
you act like Houston doesn't have injury concerns as well.  They've also only had 4 players play in all 14 games and like Boston their 2nd best player got hurt in their first game and he hasn't played since.  Houston has played a tougher schedule thus far and is 11-3.  It certainly isn't crazy to put them ahead of Boston on the season.

The injury concerns to the top players are quite a bit more severe for Boston than Houston. Not counting Paul or Hayward, our top three (Irving, Al, and Morris - 12 missed games) has missed significantly more games than their top six guys (Harden, Ariza, Gordon, Capela, Anderson, and Williams - 5 missed games).

Adding that to our 12 game win streak, better overall record, and fairly similar strength of schedule, yeah, it's definitely crazy putting them over us.
Quote from:  Ron Swanson
It's never too early to learn that the government is a greedy piglet that suckles on a taxpayer's teet until they have sore, chapped nipples.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #61 on: November 13, 2017, 02:00:17 PM »

Offline Erik

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 184
  • Tommy Points: 47
  • The voice of reason
We're the 3rd best team so I agree with the ranking. Watch what happens to our #1 ranked defense this Thursday. You guys are honestly taking this too far. Yes, what we're doing in amazing. No, we won't beat Rockers or Warriors. They're in another league.

Put another way: if you had to bet your life savings onThursdays game with no spread, who you taking ?

Can we just enjoy the games, hype up our Young players and agree we'll have a title within 3 years?

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #62 on: November 13, 2017, 02:04:20 PM »

Offline Boston Garden Leprechaun

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6872
  • Tommy Points: 703
I am perfectly fine staying under the radar as long as possible and hope teams DO NOT take us seriously. Because there will come a time.....and BELIEVE ME.....it will be here sooner than you think that Boston will be at the top again as champions defending that heavyweight belt like GS is doing now. We will have the bullseye on our back and we will have to defend the belt against all on comers. Many teams cannot handle that type of coverage and pressure. BOSTON CAN.
LET'S GO CELTICS!

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #63 on: November 13, 2017, 02:10:01 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23109
  • Tommy Points: 2843
We're the 3rd best team so I agree with the ranking. Watch what happens to our #1 ranked defense this Thursday. You guys are honestly taking this too far. Yes, what we're doing in amazing. No, we won't beat Rockers or Warriors. They're in another league.

Put another way: if you had to bet your life savings onThursdays game with no spread, who you taking ?

Can we just enjoy the games, hype up our Young players and agree we'll have a title within 3 years?

Last year we beat the Rockets at home and lost by 1 in Houston on an official screw up counting a Bradley 3 as a 2. We got significantly better this year, are on a 12 game winning streak, and have the best record in the league. How exactly is Houston "in another league" than us??
Quote from:  Ron Swanson
It's never too early to learn that the government is a greedy piglet that suckles on a taxpayer's teet until they have sore, chapped nipples.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #64 on: November 13, 2017, 02:17:16 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16940
  • Tommy Points: 805
Power rankings are dumb, subjective ways of measuring teams, but it's pretty ridiculous that they have Houston over us given our impressive streak with our injuries. I'm not too impressed with them, and I think our elite D would cause them problems and cause them to jack up even worse shots than they already take.

Ultimately, I think we're pretty clearly the second best team in the NBA right now. Can't wait until Thursday's game against GS. Hopefully everyone is healthy (besides Gordy) so that we can have a true measurement of where we are in the league. I think we matchup even better with them now than we did last year, and we should really thrive on turning them over and pushing the ball.
you act like Houston doesn't have injury concerns as well.  They've also only had 4 players play in all 14 games and like Boston their 2nd best player got hurt in their first game and he hasn't played since.  Houston has played a tougher schedule thus far and is 11-3.  It certainly isn't crazy to put them ahead of Boston on the season.

The injury concerns to the top players are quite a bit more severe for Boston than Houston. Not counting Paul or Hayward, our top three (Irving, Al, and Morris - 12 missed games) has missed significantly more games than their top six guys (Harden, Ariza, Gordon, Capela, Anderson, and Williams - 5 missed games).

Adding that to our 12 game win streak, better overall record, and fairly similar strength of schedule, yeah, it's definitely crazy putting them over us.
including Morris as a top 4 player is incredibly misleading.  I certainly don't think he is our 4th best player even without including Hayward (Al, Kyrie, Brown, Smart, and Tatum are all better than Morris).  Al and Kyrie have missed 3 games.  That is still more than Harden and Ariza or Harden and Gordon, but isn't some crazy amount either. 
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #65 on: November 13, 2017, 02:30:40 PM »

Offline footey

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6660
  • Tommy Points: 780
Having watched Houston, and seeing how much we continue to struggle on the offensive end, I think Houston is better than us right now. 

 Who would guard Hardin?  Brown?  He'd foul out in the first quarter.  Kyrie? Get real.  Smart?  Maybe for a while.

I love our team, and our streak has been amazing.  But I can't help but feel a large dose of luck on the last couple of wins.  Our shooting is relatively poor.  This is where we miss Hayward the most IMO.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #66 on: November 13, 2017, 02:41:42 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3015
  • Tommy Points: 453
I thought last week's #3 position was fair but now that the streak is up to 12 and the C's are still the best defensive team in the league, I felt like they should've jumped up to #2. Warriors are still #1 because they are just demolishing everyone but I would feel pretty good about a match up with the Rockets as a Celtic fan.

Ironically, SRS rankings (at basketball-reference.com) had us at #2 a few days ago but at the moment we have slipped to #3 (behind HOU).  It is very close though

SRS:
1. GSW 13.68
2. HOU  7.82
3. BOS  7.38
4. TOR  5.19
5. DET  4.88
...

The thing that pushes GSW so far out on top is that their Strength of Schedule rating so far has been significantly higher than the other 4 teams listed there.

SOS:
1. MEM
2. PHI
3. GSW
...
10. TOR
...
19. HOU
20. DET
...
24.  BOS

It's still very, very early though.   13-14 games is a pretty tiny sample.

Check back on SRS rankings after about ~20-30 games.   They have a pretty good track record of correlating strongly with final season rankings by then.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.
#OneCitizenOneVote - True Election Reform:  Eliminate the anti-democratic Electoral College farce now.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #67 on: November 13, 2017, 02:44:07 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23109
  • Tommy Points: 2843
Power rankings are dumb, subjective ways of measuring teams, but it's pretty ridiculous that they have Houston over us given our impressive streak with our injuries. I'm not too impressed with them, and I think our elite D would cause them problems and cause them to jack up even worse shots than they already take.

Ultimately, I think we're pretty clearly the second best team in the NBA right now. Can't wait until Thursday's game against GS. Hopefully everyone is healthy (besides Gordy) so that we can have a true measurement of where we are in the league. I think we matchup even better with them now than we did last year, and we should really thrive on turning them over and pushing the ball.
you act like Houston doesn't have injury concerns as well.  They've also only had 4 players play in all 14 games and like Boston their 2nd best player got hurt in their first game and he hasn't played since.  Houston has played a tougher schedule thus far and is 11-3.  It certainly isn't crazy to put them ahead of Boston on the season.

The injury concerns to the top players are quite a bit more severe for Boston than Houston. Not counting Paul or Hayward, our top three (Irving, Al, and Morris - 12 missed games) has missed significantly more games than their top six guys (Harden, Ariza, Gordon, Capela, Anderson, and Williams - 5 missed games).

Adding that to our 12 game win streak, better overall record, and fairly similar strength of schedule, yeah, it's definitely crazy putting them over us.
including Morris as a top 4 player is incredibly misleading.  I certainly don't think he is our 4th best player even without including Hayward (Al, Kyrie, Brown, Smart, and Tatum are all better than Morris).  Al and Kyrie have missed 3 games.  That is still more than Harden and Ariza or Harden and Gordon, but isn't some crazy amount either.

They've missed four (you can't seriously count the 1:50 he played in the Charlotte game).

But, no, Morris is better than those guys. Tatum and Brown will both certainly be better than him in the long run, but once Morris gets back fully healthy and gelled with the team he'll be the third most consistent contributor behind Kyrie and Al. And he's probably the third or fourth best defender on the team behind Smart and Al and possibly  Baynes.

It's not misleading at all. If it wasn't for his injury he'd most likely be a full-time starter over Tatum.
Quote from:  Ron Swanson
It's never too early to learn that the government is a greedy piglet that suckles on a taxpayer's teet until they have sore, chapped nipples.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #68 on: November 13, 2017, 03:27:15 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16940
  • Tommy Points: 805
Power rankings are dumb, subjective ways of measuring teams, but it's pretty ridiculous that they have Houston over us given our impressive streak with our injuries. I'm not too impressed with them, and I think our elite D would cause them problems and cause them to jack up even worse shots than they already take.

Ultimately, I think we're pretty clearly the second best team in the NBA right now. Can't wait until Thursday's game against GS. Hopefully everyone is healthy (besides Gordy) so that we can have a true measurement of where we are in the league. I think we matchup even better with them now than we did last year, and we should really thrive on turning them over and pushing the ball.
you act like Houston doesn't have injury concerns as well.  They've also only had 4 players play in all 14 games and like Boston their 2nd best player got hurt in their first game and he hasn't played since.  Houston has played a tougher schedule thus far and is 11-3.  It certainly isn't crazy to put them ahead of Boston on the season.

The injury concerns to the top players are quite a bit more severe for Boston than Houston. Not counting Paul or Hayward, our top three (Irving, Al, and Morris - 12 missed games) has missed significantly more games than their top six guys (Harden, Ariza, Gordon, Capela, Anderson, and Williams - 5 missed games).

Adding that to our 12 game win streak, better overall record, and fairly similar strength of schedule, yeah, it's definitely crazy putting them over us.
including Morris as a top 4 player is incredibly misleading.  I certainly don't think he is our 4th best player even without including Hayward (Al, Kyrie, Brown, Smart, and Tatum are all better than Morris).  Al and Kyrie have missed 3 games.  That is still more than Harden and Ariza or Harden and Gordon, but isn't some crazy amount either.

They've missed four (you can't seriously count the 1:50 he played in the Charlotte game).

But, no, Morris is better than those guys. Tatum and Brown will both certainly be better than him in the long run, but once Morris gets back fully healthy and gelled with the team he'll be the third most consistent contributor behind Kyrie and Al. And he's probably the third or fourth best defender on the team behind Smart and Al and possibly  Baynes.

It's not misleading at all. If it wasn't for his injury he'd most likely be a full-time starter over Tatum.
one extra game, oh my.  Morris' best season is 14/5/2.5 in 36 mpg.  That is a role player, plain and simply.  He is not better than Brown.  He is not better than Smart.  He is not better than Tatum.  Morris is a nice player, but if Hayward was here, Tatum, not Morris would be the starting PF (and for the record per minute, the 5 games Morris has played this year would be well above his career best in almost every major category). 
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #69 on: November 13, 2017, 03:46:28 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27991
  • Tommy Points: 1116
It's still very, very early though.   13-14 games is a pretty tiny sample.

Check back on SRS rankings after about ~20-30 games.   They have a pretty good track record of correlating strongly with final season rankings by then.
The rule of thumb I always hear cited among analysts is that at 20 NBA games you have a pretty clear picture of the league for that year and where teams will end up.

Barring meteoric runs like last year's Heat team or monumental collapses like the Pacers when they suddenly turned into a frog. (that frog did still make the ECF again though so I guess they don't violate it after all)

Now I'm trying to think of teams that started out very strong and nose dived without huge injuries...

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #70 on: November 13, 2017, 03:59:43 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23109
  • Tommy Points: 2843
Power rankings are dumb, subjective ways of measuring teams, but it's pretty ridiculous that they have Houston over us given our impressive streak with our injuries. I'm not too impressed with them, and I think our elite D would cause them problems and cause them to jack up even worse shots than they already take.

Ultimately, I think we're pretty clearly the second best team in the NBA right now. Can't wait until Thursday's game against GS. Hopefully everyone is healthy (besides Gordy) so that we can have a true measurement of where we are in the league. I think we matchup even better with them now than we did last year, and we should really thrive on turning them over and pushing the ball.
you act like Houston doesn't have injury concerns as well.  They've also only had 4 players play in all 14 games and like Boston their 2nd best player got hurt in their first game and he hasn't played since.  Houston has played a tougher schedule thus far and is 11-3.  It certainly isn't crazy to put them ahead of Boston on the season.

The injury concerns to the top players are quite a bit more severe for Boston than Houston. Not counting Paul or Hayward, our top three (Irving, Al, and Morris - 12 missed games) has missed significantly more games than their top six guys (Harden, Ariza, Gordon, Capela, Anderson, and Williams - 5 missed games).

Adding that to our 12 game win streak, better overall record, and fairly similar strength of schedule, yeah, it's definitely crazy putting them over us.
including Morris as a top 4 player is incredibly misleading.  I certainly don't think he is our 4th best player even without including Hayward (Al, Kyrie, Brown, Smart, and Tatum are all better than Morris).  Al and Kyrie have missed 3 games.  That is still more than Harden and Ariza or Harden and Gordon, but isn't some crazy amount either.

They've missed four (you can't seriously count the 1:50 he played in the Charlotte game).

But, no, Morris is better than those guys. Tatum and Brown will both certainly be better than him in the long run, but once Morris gets back fully healthy and gelled with the team he'll be the third most consistent contributor behind Kyrie and Al. And he's probably the third or fourth best defender on the team behind Smart and Al and possibly  Baynes.

It's not misleading at all. If it wasn't for his injury he'd most likely be a full-time starter over Tatum.
one extra game, oh my.  Morris' best season is 14/5/2.5 in 36 mpg.  That is a role player, plain and simply.  He is not better than Brown.  He is not better than Smart.  He is not better than Tatum.  Morris is a nice player, but if Hayward was here, Tatum, not Morris would be the starting PF (and for the record per minute, the 5 games Morris has played this year would be well above his career best in almost every major category).

Yeah, that's just empirically false. Before the season and Morris' injury Brad explicitly stated that Morris would be the starter at the 4 most nights, and he would switch with Baynes depending upon the matchup.

I love Tatum as much as anyone, and he's going to end up being a star. But this is revisionist history to suggest that he would've started from the get-go if Hayward was healthy. That's flat out false.
Quote from:  Ron Swanson
It's never too early to learn that the government is a greedy piglet that suckles on a taxpayer's teet until they have sore, chapped nipples.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #71 on: November 13, 2017, 04:11:49 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16940
  • Tommy Points: 805
Power rankings are dumb, subjective ways of measuring teams, but it's pretty ridiculous that they have Houston over us given our impressive streak with our injuries. I'm not too impressed with them, and I think our elite D would cause them problems and cause them to jack up even worse shots than they already take.

Ultimately, I think we're pretty clearly the second best team in the NBA right now. Can't wait until Thursday's game against GS. Hopefully everyone is healthy (besides Gordy) so that we can have a true measurement of where we are in the league. I think we matchup even better with them now than we did last year, and we should really thrive on turning them over and pushing the ball.
you act like Houston doesn't have injury concerns as well.  They've also only had 4 players play in all 14 games and like Boston their 2nd best player got hurt in their first game and he hasn't played since.  Houston has played a tougher schedule thus far and is 11-3.  It certainly isn't crazy to put them ahead of Boston on the season.

The injury concerns to the top players are quite a bit more severe for Boston than Houston. Not counting Paul or Hayward, our top three (Irving, Al, and Morris - 12 missed games) has missed significantly more games than their top six guys (Harden, Ariza, Gordon, Capela, Anderson, and Williams - 5 missed games).

Adding that to our 12 game win streak, better overall record, and fairly similar strength of schedule, yeah, it's definitely crazy putting them over us.
including Morris as a top 4 player is incredibly misleading.  I certainly don't think he is our 4th best player even without including Hayward (Al, Kyrie, Brown, Smart, and Tatum are all better than Morris).  Al and Kyrie have missed 3 games.  That is still more than Harden and Ariza or Harden and Gordon, but isn't some crazy amount either.

They've missed four (you can't seriously count the 1:50 he played in the Charlotte game).

But, no, Morris is better than those guys. Tatum and Brown will both certainly be better than him in the long run, but once Morris gets back fully healthy and gelled with the team he'll be the third most consistent contributor behind Kyrie and Al. And he's probably the third or fourth best defender on the team behind Smart and Al and possibly  Baynes.

It's not misleading at all. If it wasn't for his injury he'd most likely be a full-time starter over Tatum.
one extra game, oh my.  Morris' best season is 14/5/2.5 in 36 mpg.  That is a role player, plain and simply.  He is not better than Brown.  He is not better than Smart.  He is not better than Tatum.  Morris is a nice player, but if Hayward was here, Tatum, not Morris would be the starting PF (and for the record per minute, the 5 games Morris has played this year would be well above his career best in almost every major category).

Yeah, that's just empirically false. Before the season and Morris' injury Brad explicitly stated that Morris would be the starter at the 4 most nights, and he would switch with Baynes depending upon the matchup.

I love Tatum as much as anyone, and he's going to end up being a star. But this is revisionist history to suggest that he would've started from the get-go if Hayward was healthy. That's flat out false.
Except you know Tatum thus far this year has played better than Morris at any time in his career.  Tatum is already better than Morris and the gap is only going to get larger.
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #72 on: November 13, 2017, 04:13:48 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14747
  • Tommy Points: 935
Life in general is not fair.   Who cares what ESPN has us ranked.

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #73 on: November 13, 2017, 04:49:55 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16298
  • Tommy Points: 1152
Life in general is not fair.   Who cares what ESPN has us ranked.
No, that's not the way it works in the Brave New World. You're supposed to be offended by those power rankings. Nay, genuinely outraged! Forsooth, the audacity of these chaps!
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: ESPN Ranks Celtics 3rd in NBA--Fair?
« Reply #74 on: November 13, 2017, 04:54:14 PM »

Offline GratefulCs

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2537
  • Tommy Points: 437
  • Salmon and Mashed Potatoes
What the heck is an espn?
I trust Danny Ainge