Who is the Most Overrated Team in the East ..aka.. Why Boston Sux.

[Zainab]

Hey Raptors fans, if you’re at the ACC tonight, start a Bruno chant with 10:20 left in the 4th quarter to honour the legend, and his first NBA points.

— Faizal Khamisa (@SNFaizalKhamisa) February 8, 2018

[Zainab]

Report: @DwyaneWade's first game back with the @MiamiHEAT will be Tuesday in Toronto against the Raptors

— Miami Heat Beat (@miaheatbeat) February 8, 2018

[Zainab]

The Toronto Raptors have to be happy. They retain the most complete roster in the East.

Cavs added some power but are still a lottery roster coached by Ty Lue.

Celtics did not improve their scoring ability.

— Sandro Rubin (@Insider6ix) February 8, 2018

[Zainab]

Who’s your pick to win the East and go to the #NBA Finals? #Raptors #Cavs #Celtics

— Tim and Sid (@timandsid) February 8, 2018

[Zainab]

Biggest winners at the deadline: Raptors and Celtics. Cavs are not markedly improved, rebuilding the team on the fly. And they literally open the door for LeBron to go to the Lakers next season. Short and long term win for the rest of the East.

— Gareth Wheeler (@WheelerTSN) February 8, 2018

[KeonClark]

Didn't really care if we got Vince before but....COME ONNN

We've had nothing exciting transaction wise since Ibaka 1 year ago. Offseason was boring. Everybody else always adds these buyout guys (GS, Cle, Bos)....CAN WE PLAY TOO FOR ONCE

[octothorp]

The 'I feel like I'm taking crazy pills' moment I keep having is when people talk about how good the Celtics will be in the playoffs because they have such a good record in clutch games. This is antithetical to every analytics model out there that values margin of victory as a positive, not a negative. Teams who get to the final four tend to have a good clutch winning percentage (.500 or better), but beyond that there isn't a strong correlation... every year teams with good clutch winning percentages get eliminated early, often by teams with worse clutch winning percentages.

So I've been looking at non-clutch wins. Non clutch wins are all the wins you accumulate in which you do not enter a clutch situation and it clearly correlates better to playoff success than clutch winning percentage. Basically, you treat every clutch game as a loss for the purpose of the average. This stat is to identify the ruthless, curb-stomping teams, take no prisoners teams. Looking through recent NBA history, it seems a NCW% of .300 - .400 is good, and better than .400 is great.

This seems like a useful poor-man's analytic model, as it picks up some interesting things in upsets; for example, in the finals two years ago, Warriors had a massive edge over Cleveland in both W%, and CW%. They were historically great by both measures. But while they still had a margin in NCW%, it was a much smaller margin than in the year previous and after. NCW% showed that they were involved in more close games than other years. When Cleveland upset Atlanta, Atlanta had a significantly better CW% and W%, but they actually had a worse NCW%.

In general, high seeds with high numbers of clutch wins tend to underperform compared to similarly-ranked teams with fewer clutch wins and more non-clutch wins. Last year, Boston, Toronto, and Cleveland were roughly even in the standings, but Cleveland had a much better NCW% than the other two. Same with Toronto the year before.

Which is why I think Boston fans shouldn't be expecting a deep run to the finals this year. They've got a low NCW% of about .300, which is consistent with high-ranked seeds that underperform in the playoffs. Good enough to win a round any maybe two, but not finals material. Toronto's NCW% is around .450, which isn't quite elite, but is still very strong and around the minimum bar for getting to the finals.

[SkywalkerAC]

Didn't really care if we got Vince before but....COME ONNN

We've had nothing exciting transaction wise since Ibaka 1 year ago. Offseason was boring. Everybody else always adds these buyout guys (GS, Cle, Bos)....CAN WE PLAY TOO FOR ONCE

Might not be Vince but I'm pretty sure we add someone.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Boston lost, Raps top in the east by win percentage now

[blackjitsu]

Boston lost, Raps top in the east by win percentage now

Is this the latest in a season that the Raps have been first in the East?

[DanH]

Is this the latest in a season that the Raps have been first in the East?

Yep. Ever. By quite a margin too, I think the latest was early Jan in 2015.

[Puffer]

The 'I feel like I'm taking crazy pills' moment I keep having is when people talk about how good the Celtics will be in the playoffs because they have such a good record in clutch games. This is antithetical to every analytics model out there that values margin of victory as a positive, not a negative. Teams who get to the final four tend to have a good clutch winning percentage (.500 or better), but beyond that there isn't a strong correlation... every year teams with good clutch winning percentages get eliminated early, often by teams with worse clutch winning percentages.

So I've been looking at non-clutch wins. Non clutch wins are all the wins you accumulate in which you do not enter a clutch situation and it clearly correlates better to playoff success than clutch winning percentage. Basically, you treat every clutch game as a loss for the purpose of the average. This stat is to identify the ruthless, curb-stomping teams, take no prisoners teams. Looking through recent NBA history, it seems a NCW% of .300 - .400 is good, and better than .400 is great.

This seems like a useful poor-man's analytic model, as it picks up some interesting things in upsets; for example, in the finals two years ago, Warriors had a massive edge over Cleveland in both W%, and CW%. They were historically great by both measures. But while they still had a margin in NCW%, it was a much smaller margin than in the year previous and after. NCW% showed that they were involved in more close games than other years. When Cleveland upset Atlanta, Atlanta had a significantly better CW% and W%, but they actually had a worse NCW%.

In general, high seeds with high numbers of clutch wins tend to underperform compared to similarly-ranked teams with fewer clutch wins and more non-clutch wins. Last year, Boston, Toronto, and Cleveland were roughly even in the standings, but Cleveland had a much better NCW% than the other two. Same with Toronto the year before.

Which is why I think Boston fans shouldn't be expecting a deep run to the finals this year. They've got a low NCW% of about .300, which is consistent with high-ranked seeds that underperform in the playoffs. Good enough to win a round any maybe two, but not finals material. Toronto's NCW% is around .450, which isn't quite elite, but is still very strong and around the minimum bar for getting to the finals.

I think you invented a new statistical correlation. You should have kept quiet about it and placed some bets :-)

Encouraging.

[golden]

I think you invented a new statistical correlation. You should have kept quiet about it and placed some bets :-)

Encouraging.

Yep. That's the whole point of this thread.... short the Chowders.

[The Great One]

IT on Lonzo: I'm in my prime. I'm not taking backseat to nobody.

Lol

[planetmars]

Wonder how much IT will get next season? Denver could still use a PG. Not sure what their cap situation is like, but it wouldn't surprise me if IT got only a mid level deal. There is no way he's getting anything in the $20M or higher range unless a team is willing to give him a 1 year deal like Philly did with Redick.