John Hollinger's Western Conference forecasts are up at the ESPN site. It's Insider-only content, but he's going with what I imagine will be the controversial idea that Houston will finish number one ahead of San Antonio and Dallas (numbers two and three respectively). His argument rests, in part, on the fact that last year's scoring differential predicted 57.4 wins as opposed to the 52 that the team actually got, so he sets that as the baseline. What's more, he says, "the addition of more players who can create their own shot is going to be a huge benefit to the offense, which was excruciating to watch last season." And, indeed, despite his reputation as a ball hog, Steve Francis was a pretty efficient scorer last season.
« Edwards on Contractors | Main | Taylor on Abolition »
Rocket to Houston
03 Oct 2007 07:34 am
Comments (14)
Er, what sport is this supposed to be about? (I'm a Brit, and the sport I don't watch is soccer.)
I agree with Freddie. Close games tend to come down to particular skills, and if your team doesn't have them - free throw shooting is the most obvious thing - then you will not do well in close games, and that seems like it would be sticky from year to year.
I think Dallas is likely to come down in the win total some this year, but more because I think they will understand that having every last win from the regular season isn't as important as having your team playing at its best for the second season. I expect fewer minutes for the main contributors there, and a slew of "Is Dirk still suffering from last year's collapse?" articles even though his production per minute played will still be as good if not better. (See Duncan, Tim: 2003-present).
Houston is certainly the wild card team in the division. I think they end up missing JVG more than they expect and that their improved offense won't keep up with their losses on the other end, and they will be about in the same place again this year as last. I don't see them being any higher than the 4-6 seed. But I would be happy to be wrong about this.
unless you're capable of predicting tracy macgrady's ability to play 82 games, you're not capable of predicting houston's season.
Howard is right, except that Houston got its 52 last year with both McGrady and Yao out for significant stretches. Then they wore out at the end of games in the Utah series. Adelman has started camp running their asses off (exept for Yao, who found a reason to be late), rather than the diagramming and drills that JVG favored.
So how high does Hollinger place Denver? Does Seattle get any love for its revamping?
paperpusher, sure, houston is a pretty good team (and i'm a coach van gundy fan), but the only way that houston has a shot beating out san antonio and dallas is for macgrady (and yao, but i regard his injury as more of an outlier, whereas macgrady has had an ongoing back problem, which is what ultimately croaked larry bird) to play 82 games.
and i can't predict that, and neither can hollinger....
No statistic is going to convince me that Steve Francis is still any good.
"One of the weird things about Hollinger's method is that he seems to privilege teams that lost a lot of close games."
Yup. I still don't understand his focus on point differential as being more important than W-L record. Seems fundamentally weird to me for many of the reasons Freddie is mentioning.
"No statistic is going to convince me that Steve Francis is still any good."
No position on the court gets even half as much hate as the combo guard.
first target of blame when the Rockets fail to ignite - 4 (5?) combo guards on the roster! Adelman clearly loves the combo; he's all about playmaking and firepower.
You've said yourself that the combo guard who relies on his explosion goes from asset to liability fast once he loses a step. Steve Francis has lost two or three steps.
Er, make that "explosiveness," not "explosion."
adelman's motion offense doesn't require anybody to blow by the defense, however. it produces open shots, so francis doesn't have to his dive-into-the-lane-and-get-up-in-the-air-with-no-place-to-go.
"You've said yourself that the combo guard who relies on his explosion goes from asset to liability fast once he loses a step. Steve Francis has lost two or three steps."
Fair 'nuff.
But I think Francis can still ball a bit, especially if his minutes are well managed.
The gag for Houston is to open up the floor for McGrady and Yao, and I'd imagine a smart system being able to make use of the Steve Francises and Mike Jameses of the world.
-----
"so francis doesn't have to his dive-into-the-lane-and-get-up-in-the-air-with-no-place-to-go."
I think that's still a reasonably efficient move for his team.
Stuff like that ends up with him at the charity stripe bizarrely often.
-----
Francis obviously isn't enough to be the #1 guy on a winning NBA franchise, but assuming he can stay healthy, I like him a lot as a third or fourth option.
If Francis is healthy, if Scola fits in, if Bonzi shows up, Houston should win 85 games in the regular season.
Comments closed October 17, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
One of the weird things about Hollinger's method is that he seems to privilege teams that lost a lot of close games. In his analysis of San Antonio, for example, he talks about the fact that San Antonio lost many close games, where Dallas won many of it's close games, and that, since change plays a large role in determining the outcome of close games, we should add some games to San Antonio's win total and subtract some from Dallas's, for predictive purposes. While I agree that chance plays a large part in winning those kinds of games, I also believe winning close games is a skill, and to essentially penalize a team for doing it well seems odd.
Posted by Freddie | October 3, 2007 7:52 AM