But what if KP is better, Noah or Rose or both are more healthy and Jennings returns to full confidence as well? If all those things happen I think we can compete with anyone but Golden State. I am not saying that with being blind to the team's potential downside.

I think worse case is 38 wins. If KP shows no improvement from year 1, Rose and Noah are the same as last year and Jennings is the same player as last year as well. If that is the case, yes this team is not better than 38-41 wins. However if they get a few players in better condition, I would be surprised if they missed the playoffs. This looks like a solid playoff team unless everyone new added to the team has a season filled with injuries (which historically is only more likely with Rose).

nyknickzingis wrote:38-41 wins is fine based on last year's production from Noah, Porzingis, Rose, and Jennings.

But what if KP is better, Noah or Rose or both are more healthy and Jennings returns to full confidence as well? If all those things happen I think we can compete with anyone but Golden State. I am not saying that with being blind to the team's potential downside.

I think worse case is 38 wins. If KP shows no improvement from year 1, Rose and Noah are the same as last year and Jennings is the same player as last year as well. If that is the case, yes this team is not better than 38-41 wins. However if they get a few players in better condition, I would be surprised if they missed the playoffs. This looks like a solid playoff team unless everyone new added to the team has a season filled with injuries (which historically is only more likely with Rose).

CrushAlot wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:38-41 wins is fine based on last year's production from Noah, Porzingis, Rose, and Jennings.

But what if KP is better, Noah or Rose or both are more healthy and Jennings returns to full confidence as well? If all those things happen I think we can compete with anyone but Golden State. I am not saying that with being blind to the team's potential downside.

I think worse case is 38 wins. If KP shows no improvement from year 1, Rose and Noah are the same as last year and Jennings is the same player as last year as well. If that is the case, yes this team is not better than 38-41 wins. However if they get a few players in better condition, I would be surprised if they missed the playoffs. This looks like a solid playoff team unless everyone new added to the team has a season filled with injuries (which historically is only more likely with Rose).

I think they make the playoffs. I think 48-51 wins is a reasonable prediction with the team peaking in April. Also, Melo has his shot back and hasn't played with teammates like he has since the 54 win season. The difference is that the two oldest guys on the team are 32.

I don't think they are as good as that team. Melo is not nearly as good, Tyson at that point was still better than KP (at this point), Kidd was playing out of his mind and coaching / controlling the quart and killing it from 3, JR was 6 man of the year, etc ...

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:38-41 wins is fine based on last year's production from Noah, Porzingis, Rose, and Jennings.

But what if KP is better, Noah or Rose or both are more healthy and Jennings returns to full confidence as well? If all those things happen I think we can compete with anyone but Golden State. I am not saying that with being blind to the team's potential downside.

I think worse case is 38 wins. If KP shows no improvement from year 1, Rose and Noah are the same as last year and Jennings is the same player as last year as well. If that is the case, yes this team is not better than 38-41 wins. However if they get a few players in better condition, I would be surprised if they missed the playoffs. This looks like a solid playoff team unless everyone new added to the team has a season filled with injuries (which historically is only more likely with Rose).

I think they make the playoffs. I think 48-51 wins is a reasonable prediction with the team peaking in April. Also, Melo has his shot back and hasn't played with teammates like he has since the 54 win season. The difference is that the two oldest guys on the team are 32.

I don't think they are as good as that team. Melo is not nearly as good, Tyson at that point was still better than KP (at this point), Kidd was playing out of his mind and coaching / controlling the quart and killing it from 3, JR was 6 man of the year, etc ...

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:38-41 wins is fine based on last year's production from Noah, Porzingis, Rose, and Jennings.

But what if KP is better, Noah or Rose or both are more healthy and Jennings returns to full confidence as well? If all those things happen I think we can compete with anyone but Golden State. I am not saying that with being blind to the team's potential downside.

I think worse case is 38 wins. If KP shows no improvement from year 1, Rose and Noah are the same as last year and Jennings is the same player as last year as well. If that is the case, yes this team is not better than 38-41 wins. However if they get a few players in better condition, I would be surprised if they missed the playoffs. This looks like a solid playoff team unless everyone new added to the team has a season filled with injuries (which historically is only more likely with Rose).

I think they make the playoffs. I think 48-51 wins is a reasonable prediction with the team peaking in April. Also, Melo has his shot back and hasn't played with teammates like he has since the 54 win season. The difference is that the two oldest guys on the team are 32.

I don't think they are as good as that team. Melo is not nearly as good, Tyson at that point was still better than KP (at this point), Kidd was playing out of his mind and coaching / controlling the quart and killing it from 3, JR was 6 man of the year, etc ...

Tyson =Noah. Noah is better than Tyson 8 days a week even if he is in a suit. Rose/Jennings/Lee hopefully is better than Kidd/Felton. I think Noah covers Kidd's leadership and I think Jennings/Rose/Lee is a good enough backcourt to get the knicks to 45+ wins.

prime noah was better than Tyson. Last years noah was not even close to Tyson-54.

meloshouldgo wrote:In total over a period of multiple years thexperience predictive models will beat out random predictions over and over again. And they weren't 27% accurate, that was your somewhat arbitraty calculation. If you want to measure accuracy then calculate standard deviation of their predictions vs.the results over multiple years. But you won't do that. You will keep harping on one year without providing any evidence that random guesses are actually better.

basically, in order to exceed that range, ie 43 wins and up, kp6 will have to explode somewhat in his second season... but for that to happen hornacek is going to have to coach the team well, particularly the point guards on the roster

mreinman wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Lottery numbers cannot be predicted using statistical models. Each lottery is a new event, the past outcomes have no impact on it. On the other hand, human performance around team sports can be better analyzed using statistical models. How a player played in the last few years is s good predictor of how he will play next year.

Exactly but I don't think you'll convince him at this point. There's a huge difference between purely random events and events that can be predicted pretty well but imperfectly.

Bleacher Report 2015-16
= within 5 wins/losses of prediction
= more than 5 wins/losses of prediction

Hawks prediction 50-32, Actual 48-34
Celtics 43-39, Actual 48-34
Nets 29-53, Actual 21-61
Hornets 30-52, Actual 48-34
Bulls 51-31, Actual 42-40
Cavs 54-28, Actual 57-25
Mavs 32-50, Actual 42-40
Nuggets 24-58, Actual 33-49
Pistons 37-45, Actual 44-38
Warriors 60-22, Actual 73-9
Rockets 56-26, Actual 41-41
Pacers 39-43, Actual 45-37
Clips 57-25, Actual 53-29
Lakers 25-57, Actual 17-65
Grizz 52-30, Actual 42-40
Heat 46-36, Actual 48-34
Bucks 42-40, Actual 33-49
Timberwolves 22-60, Actual 29-53
Pelicans 46-36, Actual 30-52
Knicks 28-54, Actual 32-50
Thunder 59-23, Actual 55-27
Magic 27-55, Actual 35-47
76ers 20-62, Actual 10-72
Suns 37-45, Actual 23-59
Blazers 25-57, Actual 44-38
Kings 35-47, Actual 33-49
Spurs 55-27, Actual 67-15
Raptors 48-34, Actual 56-26

Total somewhat accurate predictions - 8
Total not even close predictions - 22
Percentage of accuracy = 8*100/30 < 27%
Average margin by which predictions were off = Add all margins / 30 = 240 / 30 = 8 wins/losses
Knicks 2016-17 prediction 38 wins. This means we should not be surprised if we win 30 to 46 games. Oh wow great. I could have predicted that in my sleep.
Is this your definition of imperfect prediction, but "predicted well"??? GTFOH.

Interesting. Go right ahead and predict the win loss record for every team this year and let's see you beat whatever this year's win shares based predictions is on accuracy. It's s simple enough position to put to test.

The rest of us can take bets on how good or bad you are. This can be a fun season long activity.

Um...I am not the one claiming that predictions of win/loss records before the season even begins is a worthwhile exercise, my whole post was to refute exactly that. The so called "experts" in NBA predictions that you and Bonn and maybe mreinman are touting as almost gospel in this thread... they don't know $h|t.... So perhaps you and Bonn and mreinman should go ahead and make the predictions? I can bet you that your predictions will have the same level of accuracy as the folks you are agreeing with. In other words, they don't know any better or worse than you before the season begins.

Why should I waste my time with that...you guys think it's a worthwhile exercise...so YOU do it.

No one said anything about predictions being gospel. Instead I called you out to back up your very real statement that you can make predctiona matching statistical models in your sleep. Appears you are not man enough to accept the challenge so you need to hide behind this level of double talk. SHOCKING.

I am confused...are you agreeing with Bonn that these predictions are a worthwhile exercise or not? That's where we started. Answer this.
As far as being man enough to accept the challenge, I don't accept challenges that would be a waste of my time. No double talk.

I predicted 33 last year and 45 this year. Whats yours?

i'll let you know in december

Bonn1997 wrote:Here's SI's 2015-16 win projections using win shares. I'll use 2 smiley faces if the projection was within 6 wins, 1 if it was off by single digits, and the angry face if it was well-off and useless (10 or more away), which is what you seem to think characterizes all of the projections. It's rare that it was way off, and even then, in many cases they weren't really that far off. For instance, they were off by more than 10 for Philly and GSW but still predicted those two teams would have the worst and best records in the NBA (respectively). In that case, it was just a few teams in the west that they were way off on. With injuries and other chance factors, you'd have to expect a few to be way off anyway.
1. Toronto Raptors (52.9 combined win shares)
2. Cleveland Cavaliers (51.4)
3. Chicago Bulls (51.2)
4. Atlanta Hawks (50.8)
5. Boston Celtics (47.4)
6. Washington Wizards (44.3)
7. Charlotte Hornets (41.6)
8. Miami Heat (41.4)
9. Milwaukee Bucks (40.0)
10. Detroit Pistons (39.9)
11. Indiana Pacers (39.0)
12. Orlando Magic (31.6)
13. Brooklyn Nets (29.7)
14. New York Knicks (28.0)
15. Philadelphia 76ers (23.2)

1. Golden State Warriors 63.0
2. Los Angeles Clippers 61.9
3. Oklahoma City Thunder 60.0
4. San Antonio Spurs 57.5
5. Memphis Grizzlies 56.6
6. Houston Rockets 53.2
7. New Orleans Pelicans 45.7
8. Phoenix Suns 41.3
9. Dallas Mavericks 41.2
10. Utah Jazz 41.2
11. Portland Trail Blazers 38.6
12. Sacramento Kings 33.5
13. Los Angeles Lakers 29.9
14. Denver Nuggets 29.6
15. Minnesota Timberwolves 23.5

http://www.si.com/nba/2015/07/16/nba-standings-predictions-hornets-thunder-celtics-blazers-mavericks

You could say single digits (one smiley face) is a generous range but most people here thought this team would be above .500 last year (off by double digits). How can it be considered useless to find out in advance that you are likely to be wrong? Win shares was consistently closer than the Vegas predictions too, meaning you could beat the odds and make money if you used the win shares last year.

So if being off by single digits is ok in your book, then this means that the prediction of 38 wins means that the Knicks could be as low as 29 wins and as high as 47 wins, right?
And you couldn't have predicted that in your sleep?

Bonn1997 wrote:Here's SI's 2015-16 win projections using win shares. I'll use 2 smiley faces if the projection was within 6 wins, 1 if it was off by single digits, and the angry face if it was well-off and useless (10 or more away), which is what you seem to think characterizes all of the projections. It's rare that it was way off, and even then, in many cases they weren't really that far off. For instance, they were off by more than 10 for Philly and GSW but still predicted those two teams would have the worst and best records in the NBA (respectively). In that case, it was just a few teams in the west that they were way off on. With injuries and other chance factors, you'd have to expect a few to be way off anyway.
1. Toronto Raptors (52.9 combined win shares)
2. Cleveland Cavaliers (51.4)
3. Chicago Bulls (51.2)
4. Atlanta Hawks (50.8)
5. Boston Celtics (47.4)
6. Washington Wizards (44.3)
7. Charlotte Hornets (41.6)
8. Miami Heat (41.4)
9. Milwaukee Bucks (40.0)
10. Detroit Pistons (39.9)
11. Indiana Pacers (39.0)
12. Orlando Magic (31.6)
13. Brooklyn Nets (29.7)
14. New York Knicks (28.0)
15. Philadelphia 76ers (23.2)

1. Golden State Warriors 63.0
2. Los Angeles Clippers 61.9
3. Oklahoma City Thunder 60.0
4. San Antonio Spurs 57.5
5. Memphis Grizzlies 56.6
6. Houston Rockets 53.2
7. New Orleans Pelicans 45.7
8. Phoenix Suns 41.3
9. Dallas Mavericks 41.2
10. Utah Jazz 41.2
11. Portland Trail Blazers 38.6
12. Sacramento Kings 33.5
13. Los Angeles Lakers 29.9
14. Denver Nuggets 29.6
15. Minnesota Timberwolves 23.5

http://www.si.com/nba/2015/07/16/nba-standings-predictions-hornets-thunder-celtics-blazers-mavericks

You could say single digits (one smiley face) is a generous range but most people here thought this team would be above .500 last year (off by double digits). How can it be considered useless to find out in advance that you are likely to be wrong? Win shares was consistently closer than the Vegas predictions too, meaning you could beat the odds and make money if you used the win shares last year.

only 16 out of 30 were 6 wins or fewer? that does not seem very good to me. based on 4 or fewer:

toronto
new york
atlanta
boston
washington
orlando

dallas
utah
sacramento
denver

that's "merely" 10 out of 30 predictions. i say "merely" because i don't know if this still seems like a good basis for betting or predictions.

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:last summer i used win shares of players coming and going to arrive at a figure of 34 wins last season. this summer i have done much the same and have arrived at between 38-43 wins, factoring in my own personal probability scale of injury to rose, noah, and melo.

basically, in order to exceed that range, ie 43 wins and up, kp6 will have to explode somewhat in his second season... but for that to happen hornacek is going to have to coach the team well, particularly the point guards on the roster

I expect the Knicks to exceed the Win Share predictions. Rose and Noah IMO will be refreshed mentally, physically and will be more motivated. The roster will have more talent around them, so neither player will have to overexert themselves. The individual players will be able to get easier looks when there are multiple threats on the floor with this improved roster.

A transition with Rose pushing the ball should create openings for others as he draws attention.

Transition PPP 2015-16
Courtney Lee        1.40
Kyle O'Quinn        1.17
Lance Thomas        1.14
Kristaps Porzingis  0.95
Carmelo Anthony     0.93
Derrick Rose        0.85
Sasha Vujacic       0.80
Brandon Jennings    0.74

The same with Screens and PnR plays. Melo and KP are special players since they are threats from anywhere on the floor and this will only help Rose in PnR plays. Increasing the amount of PnR and Screen plays should really help to boost the team's scoring ability.

Pick and Roll Ball Handler PPP 2015-16
Courtney Lee        0.93	
Derrick Rose        0.84
Carmelo Anthony     0.80
Brandon Jennings    0.61	
Pick and Roll Finisher PPP 2015-16
Kristaps Porzingis  1.07	
Carmelo Anthony     0.97
Lance Thomas        0.83
Kyle O'Quinn        0.77
Off Screen PPP 2015-16
Carmelo Anthony     1.08
Kristaps Porzingis  0.89
Derrick Rose        0.88
Courtney Lee        0.87
Justin Holiday      0.73

The Head Coach has a style that fits the strengths of these players. Hornacek's schemes will enhance the strengths of the players on this team. It's actually easy to know this because the uptempo, Spread, PnR and Screen heavy style he's bringing is statistically shown to be the best part of many of the players game. IMO we should see an increase in efficiency from these players as they improve in their execution of PnR, Screens, Cuts and shooting more 3pt shots.

I can't find the article now but I believe that source that predicted 38 wins based on win shares was already assuming that Rose, Noah, Jennings, and KP would all produce more than last year. If it assumed they'd repeat last year, it probably would have come out closer to 30.

That would make me question their analysis even more if that's the case. I also read an article suggesting that even if Rose played better than last year that the Knicks would still end up with only 38 wins. I wasn't convinced of that argument.

The thing is that it's not about how these players performed when they weren't paying with each other. It's about how they'll perform as a team TOGETHER next season and that includes Hornacek and his schemes. How they'll function together is going to be of huge importance. One writer mentions the Usage for Rose and Melo and how that will be a problem.

Rose, on the other hand, was 10th among NBA point guards with a 27.3 USG% last year and was one of the top two PGs in that stat during every other season he’s played except his rookie campaign (2008–09). It doesn’t seem plausible that the Knicks will be able to maximize the performances of both Rose and Anthony (another high usage player, at 29.7% last year), while also trying to get their young star, Porzingis (24.6% last year), even more touches as he continues his development.

https://thecauldron.si.com/yeah-but-what-if-everything-goes-right-for-the-knicks-565419a26dcf#.3alr7x887

Will it be a problem tho? In Hornacek's schemes they will look for more Early Offense and Quick Scores and less slowed down Half Court. As I pointed out above the Knicks will be far more efficient with more Transition scoring attempts. With our guards last year we hardly got any transition baskets. The same goes for more PnR and Screen looks, which we didn't see enough of last year. A big increase in PnR and Screen looks will also have a positive impact on the team's efficiency. It's the combination of Players and Coach that I think these analysts are not fully exploring. Past performance is only so helpful in this regard. You have to use it as a clue but then understand how having aggressive and attacking PG's will have a positive impact on Melo and KP. Having a dependable shooter like Lee will also help to balance the floor.

it'll be a problem if hornacek can't get rose to change the way he plays. but really... never mind bout rose or jennings outside of their pushing the ball in transition. just accept that they are both not that good as playmakers in the halfcourt and you can't expect that to improve no matter how hard hornacek drives things home.

now-- your real and primary focus should be on how many frontcourt players are passers on this team!! melo surprised everyone with his playmaking passes last season and i expect coachh to continue to harness that resource. jo noah is an absolutely great passer. there are rumors of hernangomez's abilities as a passer. and then there's kp6, who has terrific court vision, is a team player, and soaks up everything at a high rate. you don't think he's interested in being a playmaker?

so the focus, especially if the triangle is being used as an inside-out offense, should be on frontcourt playmaking and the guards doing a lot of back cuts.

you win by hiding weaknesses and exploiting strengths. rose and jennings are weak at passing so why should the focus of success be dependent on that changing for the better?