[Updated] Projections for the Remaining Games
by blazer91 on Mar 21, 2009 10:21 PM PDT
100 comments
YET ANOTHER UPDATE:
So, it's been a month now since I did my initial projections, and so far the Blazers are right on course. Anyone on board with 54 wins now?
THE ORIGINAL POST (updated with the actual results of games already played)
So, here's the team's remaining schedule. I was trying to project what I thought was a fair expectation for wins and losses in the remaining games, given historical performance against these teams, known current injuries, etc. I was surprised at how rosy the picture came out:
|
Upcoming Games |
|||||
| ACTUAL | PROJ. | ||||
| Tue., Feb. 24 | @ Houston | L | W | ||
| Wed 25 | @ San Antonio | L | L | ||
| Fri 27 | @ Minnesota | W | W | ||
| Sun., Mar. 01 | vs San Antonio | W | W | ||
| Wed 04 | vs Indiana | W | W | ||
| Thu 05 | @ Denver | L | L | ||
| Sat 07 | vs Minnesota | W | W | ||
| Mon 09 | vs LA Lakers | W | L | ||
| Wed 11 | vs Dallas | L | L | ||
| Fri 13 | vs New Jersey | W | W | ||
| Sun 15 | @ Atlanta | L | L | ||
| Mon 16 | @ Memphis | W | W | ||
| Wed 18 | @ Indiana | W | W | ||
| Thu 19 | @ Cleveland | L | L | ||
| Sat 21 | @ Milwaukee | W | W | ||
| Mon 23 | vs Philadelphia | W | |||
| Thu 26 | vs Phoenix | W | |||
| Sat 28 | vs Memphis | W | |||
| Tue 31 | vs Utah | W | |||
| Fri., Apr. 03 | @ Oklahoma City | W | |||
| Sun 05 | @ Houston | L | |||
| Tue 07 | @ Memphis | W | |||
| Wed 08 | @ San Antonio | L | |||
| Fri 10 | vs LA Lakers | W | |||
| Sat 11 | @ LA Clippers | W | |||
| Mon 13 | vs Oklahoma City | W | |||
| Wed 15 | vs Denver | W | |||
If this is right, Portland would finish at 54-28
3 recs |
100 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Portland doesn't loose to the L*kers in the RG
so it should be 55 wins because march 9th should be a win.
bayless leaves over my dead body
by thomasikehara on Feb 23, 2009 12:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It should be 55 wins because jscot and I predicted it.
And while I am frequently wrong, he never is, unless he wants to be, which I assume is why he spelled Milwaukee wrong in his Sched Ahead fanpost.
by MiledAnimal on Feb 23, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Got to give this guy his dues...
He called it with the first post, the win I mean… of course we are now back on track because we lost the first projected win vs Houston. I would be very happy if we get to 50 wins… there are still a few really tricky match ups coming!
by QuebecBlzrFan on Mar 17, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I am mistaken
I thought that the tiebreaker was from the head-to-head matchups. This may have changed, but if this is the case then we can still own a tiebreaker over Denver. Just a thought.
What are you impressions of Roy?
"He's just a very, very good basketball player. Very smart. Very heady. He can do a little bit of everything on the court. As coaches, when we scout Portland we kind of put him in the same category as Kobe (Bryant), LeBron (James), Dwyane Wade. We treat him the same. He's that good."
- Byron Scott
by CMCWizard on Feb 23, 2009 12:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Would be nice
but I think there are about 4 losses in there you didnt account for. Indiana on the road scares me. Pheonix or Utah at home. San Ant. @home. OKC on the road is always scary. Not to mention at least one “what the heck” game you get from a young team.
by bad karma on Feb 23, 2009 12:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
OKC scares me
And the “what happened?” game.
San Antonio comes here without Manu. We should get that.
Phoenix and Utah both come in on a back to back. I think we get those.
At Memphis is a back to back, dangerous. Indiana is the third in four nights. It would be great to win them both.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Feb 23, 2009 3:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you "should" get 4 games
Statistically you lose one of them. Unless the “should” means 90%+
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Statistically, yes
In reality, probably not.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, but I think that projection is too optimistic...
You have us winning 19 out of the final 27 games of the season, which is at a .703 clip. For the season, we are winning at a .636 clip. The games are only going to get tougher as other teams get set to make their playoff runs. I would be happy if we managed to win at a .550 clip, which would get us to about 50 wins for the season.
by BootStrapper on Feb 23, 2009 12:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
we are also getting set for a playoff run
Considering many call him a bust and injury prone and never amount to anything. If he plays one more game this regular season, he will have played one more game than any time in bynums career, the one non-playing year excepted. Yet NO ONE in LA complains about Bynum being injury prone, all they ever do is talk about how they can’t wait until he comes back.
I think some of it is that Portland remembers Bowie, and secondly that donkeys always REMIND us of that when they talk trash and it angers us that Oden cant prove them wrong until he is healthy. - GreatOden'sRaven
by maid tu rek on Mar 10, 2009 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
woah, this thread is OLD!!!
Considering many call him a bust and injury prone and never amount to anything. If he plays one more game this regular season, he will have played one more game than any time in bynums career, the one non-playing year excepted. Yet NO ONE in LA complains about Bynum being injury prone, all they ever do is talk about how they can’t wait until he comes back.
I think some of it is that Portland remembers Bowie, and secondly that donkeys always REMIND us of that when they talk trash and it angers us that Oden cant prove them wrong until he is healthy. - GreatOden'sRaven
by maid tu rek on Mar 10, 2009 11:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
First time I ran it I came up with ten losses instead of eight, but I revised upwards on wins because:
I don’t think we lose to Phoenix at home, as I don’t think Phoenix is going to be playing for anything much longer, as I see the fade beginning. The back-to-back wins with Gentry against the Clippers were a mirage, I think.
I also don’t see us losing to a division rival like Utah at home.
I agree that Indiana is scary, and that the Blazers have, in the past, always had a WTF game thrown in there, but still ahve that as a win.
I think it is unlikely that they get swept by SA the rest of the way, especially without Ginobli, and
I hope they are stoked to exact revenge for their last loss in OKC.
by blazer91 on Feb 23, 2009 12:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Which is to say
I wasn’t picking winning percentage, so much as what I thought results would be in the ACTUAL games.
by blazer91 on Feb 23, 2009 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Love it
I know what your saying, and we can match the Blazers against any NBA team, and make an arguement for them winning. (We could also make a convincing arguement the other way as well.) If the Blazers get to 54, I would be amazed and shocked. WCF would have to be a possibilty if they can close out the rest of the year with that kind of win total.
That being said, if they win 48 – 50 games, I will still be VERY happy at the progress of this team, and will be very excited for a tough, hard fought first round of the playoffs.
by bad karma on Feb 23, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree and Disagree
I agree that 48 to 50 wins at the beginning of the season would have sounded good.
But sitting here today, you would be happy if the team finishes 13-14? Because that’s the record that would give us 48 wins. I think for this team, which is supposed to be growing, to finish with a stretch like that would be a serious step backwards, even if the final record would look good. And, I submit, that kind of closing stretch record for the team would likely not lead to a hard fought first round matchup, but an early exit, as the playoff competition will only be tougher!
by blazer91 on Feb 23, 2009 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Two years ago,
Portland was picked by many to be the worst team in the west. They ended up with a middle-of-the-pack 32 wins
last year, people that the record would be similar with out Oden. They ended up with 41 wins.
This year, people thought Portland would be in a dogfight for the final play-off sports. They are currently holding the 4 seed with less that 30 games left.
I think it is about time that we realize that this is a great team that can go out and take care of business. They arn’t overachieving, they are just that good. I think it is about time people realize it.
Will Portland get to 55 wins? I don’t know. Will I be shocked if that happened? Heck no
bayless leaves over my dead body
by thomasikehara on Feb 23, 2009 12:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
You'd think, when we keep beating expectations,
that the gurus would get a clue. Something is missing in their analyses. They need to read Blazers Edge and become savants.
by MiledAnimal on Feb 23, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or in some cases ...
idiot savants.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Feb 23, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you account for our 13 game win streak? Haven't had that yet.
My answer is we win all of them but one. Call me The Optimist.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Feb 23, 2009 1:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Good point
God I love you sometimes LJ.
I voted “Too high” but I want to change my vote to “About right”. The low expectations that people have for us is based on an incomplete understanding of who this team really is. Brandon said it in that article about the refs. Just because our players are calmer or shy, that doesn’t mean they want to win any less. I think people view us as weak because our players are young and humble. But the truth is we are mature and focused, and that is a lot more dangerous than loud and arrogant.
Blazers Prophecy.
3-5 championships in next decade.
You heard it here first.
by mjm6783 on Feb 24, 2009 2:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ability does not equal consistancy
Almost lost ot NY. Loss to OKC. Memphis kind a scary. Lambasted by Dallas. Miracle shot against Houston. Roy with 54 vs. Phoenix. Travis Outlaw. Oden’s injuries.
There are a lot of variables that will contribute to wins/losses, and we’re pretty good offensively, but not consistent! I pray they win, but if they win consistently enough to get 55, I will be shocked.
by 3pointer on Feb 23, 2009 1:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The POST's prediction require a 6-game win streak starting with Milwaukie...
So far, Portland has not had a 6-game win streak this entire season…. yet. If Portland IS going to be eclipsing the 50-win mark and getting up to the predicted 54 wins, Portland will need to be on its LONGEST WIN STREAK of the season right now in order to do so.
I voted YES, they will get to this mark mainly because of this streak thing. Is it me, or does it feel like Portland is finally starting to peak this season? Remember last seasons 13-game streak? Of course you do… Portland just had 5 games in 7 days and they had enough game to win and be competitive every game. I am not into moral victories, but that effort in Cleveland should have raised some eyebrows around the league. Even though these KIDS are tired, they seem to be out-playing oppenents. It is good to have Oden back, and it will be great to get Batum back too.
This Blazers team very well could get tht 54 win mark. I think 52 is reasonable with the remaining schedule, and 54 would be showing that this team is really on a streak!
by Portland Dynasty on Mar 21, 2009 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
its tough
My projections show for 51 wins.. but there are easily 9 of your slated wins that could go either way.. this will be a hard road ahead..
I only projected 1-2 for this next short stretch initially but I think we may be getting better and peaking. Hopefully, the peak won’t falter early..
"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum
by idoltime on Feb 23, 2009 1:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
ALL of the games could go either way
Upsets happen. Just because we are the favorite in any given game does not mean we will win, and just because we are an underdog does not mean we will lose. That’s why I don’t like trying to predict our final number of wins by putting a W or and L next to each of our future games.
by trk on Feb 23, 2009 2:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I bit too optomistic
I’ve got us for 50-51.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Feb 23, 2009 1:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
should read "a bit too optomistic"
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Feb 23, 2009 1:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My spreadsheet has us for 52
but some of our rivals have key injuries, and we’re finally getting healthy. I expect us to exceed 52.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Feb 23, 2009 3:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
don't tell Blazin'
Me, I always trust the numbers— trying to make adjustments for injuries is tough because its hard to evaluate how much of our performance has been affected by our injuries vs. the games we’ve won with other teams’ top players have been out.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Feb 23, 2009 3:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just haven't seen us
look solid against a solid team that was playing well and not on a back-to back. Or not dealing with a critical injury. When I do, I’ll be the first to jump on the “we’re for real” bandwagon. As it stands, it looks to me like we’re a year or two out.
by Blazin' on Feb 23, 2009 9:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you on the "we're for real" bandwagon yet?
:)
I think that was a solid win against a solid team that was playing well (at least, until they arrived in Portland) and wasn’t on a back to back.
Doesn’t make us suddenly a championship contender, but validates that we’re a legit playoff team.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fortunately for him he posted that before we played SA and LA
There won't be clean officiating in the NBA until David Stern is forcibly removed by the US Congress in 2013 for fixing games.
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Mar 10, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
S.A. had an injury
Manu was out.
There is no escape route for the pessimists re: the L@ker win. It was just a solid, legitimizing win. It shows that all the “taking care of business” wins aren’t flukes, we are a very good team. A great team at home, mediocre on the road, but together that makes a good team.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Snake is an anti Blazer
He projected us to win 2.8 of the last 5. We won 4!
In the next however many games Snake has us winning 11.2 of them and losing the other 7.8.
Assuming he is wrong by a 4/2.8 ratio like he was for the first 5 games… Portland goes 16-3, good for 56 wins!
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
55
Because that is what I predicted, and I am jscot.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Poor grammar
It is sometimes acceptable to leave off the subject, but you should still use proper subject-verb agreement. Like this:
“I, Zaig, Do not compute.”
Hope that helps. :)
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
Considering many call him a bust and injury prone and never amount to anything. If he plays one more game this regular season, he will have played one more game than any time in bynums career, the one non-playing year excepted. Yet NO ONE in LA complains about Bynum being injury prone, all they ever do is talk about how they can’t wait until he comes back.
I think some of it is that Portland remembers Bowie, and secondly that donkeys always REMIND us of that when they talk trash and it angers us that Oden cant prove them wrong until he is healthy. - GreatOden'sRaven
by maid tu rek on Mar 10, 2009 11:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dumb joke
He was saying my calculation “does not compute”.
I was saying that he is the one who doesn’t compute.
Someone once told me that if your joke has to be explained, it isn’t funny. I need to remember that.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 11, 2009 12:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
great, that means I wasn't funny,
You were explaining proper grammar, then I show up and go “huh”, like your speaking in a for-en (I promise I tried about ten different ways to spell it before giving up) language.
Considering many call him a bust and injury prone and never amount to anything. If he plays one more game this regular season, he will have played one more game than any time in bynums career, the one non-playing year excepted. Yet NO ONE in LA complains about Bynum being injury prone, all they ever do is talk about how they can’t wait until he comes back.
I think some of it is that Portland remembers Bowie, and secondly that donkeys always REMIND us of that when they talk trash and it angers us that Oden cant prove them wrong until he is healthy. - GreatOden'sRaven
by maid tu rek on Mar 11, 2009 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I realise that you weren't really trying to explain proper grammar,
but when I saw you lead with “poor grammar”, and then proceed to explain how any failing could only be his, using grammar as your hammer… well… that’s kinda my cue
Considering many call him a bust and injury prone and never amount to anything. If he plays one more game this regular season, he will have played one more game than any time in bynums career, the one non-playing year excepted. Yet NO ONE in LA complains about Bynum being injury prone, all they ever do is talk about how they can’t wait until he comes back.
I think some of it is that Portland remembers Bowie, and secondly that donkeys always REMIND us of that when they talk trash and it angers us that Oden cant prove them wrong until he is healthy. - GreatOden'sRaven
by maid tu rek on Mar 11, 2009 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see the 15th-21st of March...
…as a very key road trip. We only play one real good team during that stretch (ATL is over rated). However, we do play 5 games in 7 days on the road. One good thing is both back-to-backs are only a few hundred mile flights. Still a pain but at least not a long flight.
I missed a home game last year....I'm just now recovering!
by Brannon49 on Feb 23, 2009 1:56 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It would be great for that final game @ the Rose Garden
to mean something big against Denver…3 seed?
Rudy's 3rd Rule: When not shooting on offense, you should be communicating, passing, and running. Also, yell "Foul!" repeatedly. Why? How can officials summon help if you yell "Good D!" or "Our opponents are superior!"?
by Blazermaniac77 on Feb 23, 2009 2:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
that would be fun!
"Slum dunk? You just go to the rim, and crush.. crush the ball in the rim."
- Nic Batum
by idoltime on Feb 23, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
With the way the Blazers are playing now, I don't see another loss this season.
I da man!
by Dragline on Feb 23, 2009 2:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
this road trip is the big test
C*mcast sucks and Larry Miller needs to be fired because of it.
by Blazermaniac77 on Feb 23, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Only if you keep your eyes closed a long time
Brandon is one of those quiet assassins. - Chris Paul
by Norsktroll on Feb 23, 2009 2:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If only
we played the Clippers every game
by SalemORguy on Feb 23, 2009 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd prefer we play Chicago
I have no idea why, but we’ve done well against them.
If you can't laugh at yourself, everyone else probably is already.
by cafe_civet on Mar 17, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing I will say is that our homestand against Philly and PHX after the road trip might not be so rosey
I have a feeling the boys will be tired. That said I think 53 sounds very plausible and a very very good season. I love looking at the schedule now that we are so close.
There won't be clean officiating in the NBA until David Stern is forcibly removed by the US Congress in 2013 for fixing games.
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Mar 10, 2009 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So I say we win 13 more as a slightly conservative estimate
According to EngineerScotty’s magic numbers that means if Denver was to lose 7 games and Utah falls below us we will win the NW.
Wow it is close
There won't be clean officiating in the NBA until David Stern is forcibly removed by the US Congress in 2013 for fixing games.
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Mar 10, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Both of those teams
come in on a back to back.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something I did not realize
Jscot does it again
There won't be clean officiating in the NBA until David Stern is forcibly removed by the US Congress in 2013 for fixing games.
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Mar 10, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still they will be tough games
There won't be clean officiating in the NBA until David Stern is forcibly removed by the US Congress in 2013 for fixing games.
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Mar 10, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Philly doesnt scare anybody else?
besides GO rip city?
they played really well against us earlier.
Im not claiming to be a good writer/speller. But I see way too many people spelling lose, loose.
Just a FYI.
LOSE means to lack the possession of, to come to be without.
LOOSE means not tight.
by tevisthe4th on Mar 10, 2009 12:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yet Footloose was extremely tight.
Go figure.
If you can't laugh at yourself, everyone else probably is already.
by cafe_civet on Mar 17, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Loose shoes
Blazers win BDL 2 on 2 tournament!
Skeets: i’ll close it down now … congrats. you bastards
by 22baylor on Mar 17, 2009 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
54 Still too high
We still haven’t shown much on the road, so I have us picking up at least 2 more losses there than you do – Indiana, Milwauike, and OKC being the likely candidates.
Additionally, I think we drop 1 extra home game down the stretch, with the L*kers and Nuggest being the most likely culprits, maybe both.
That puts us at 50 or 51, which is enough to stay in the 7 spot or better.
With Denver’s recent losing streak, our odds on winning the NW have gone up considerably. Utah is tied with us right now, and hot, but they have one of the tougest remaining schedules out of all the West contenders with a lot more road games and a lot of games against good team. I don’t see them finishing ahead of us unless we melt down, which means as long as we can stay ahead of Denver, I think the division is ours. That won’t be easy, because they have the easiest schedule remaining out of West contenders. That said, they are slumping right now and we have 2 games on them in the loss column. If they drop a few more games they should win, we could be hosting them on April 15 with the Division title in the balance, and quite possibly homecourt advantage in the first round on the line.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Mar 10, 2009 12:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hee hee, some bias though :-)
Denver = Slumping but easy schedule
Utah = Hot as Parker’s wife but hard scedule
Portland = Somewhere in between
Not sure which one I’d wanna be here, but I don’t know if ours is the best. I’d rather be in Denver’s spot since they can break the slump, but Portland/Utah can’t change their schedule.
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Denver is already two behind
And they still have to come to Portland. They won’t want to come to Portland even in the standings, so they need to make up three games on us before that final game. Three games is not insubstantial when you are only talking about 18 games in which to do it. I don’t think they can afford any more losses in games they should win.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, but if they turn back into old Denver
The team that was 31415-1 aainst losing record teams, that 3 games becomes a lot easier to overcome. Let’s just hope they stay this mediocre Denver team that I thought they’d be all season. (I think I had them at the 8 seed in my preseason prediction. I’ll accept them falling to 7 though.)
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Atlanta may be without Marvin Williams
That is a winnable game that he has us losing.
I expect to get the ATL win, and drop one of IND or MIL. We may or may not lose another home game. Wouldn’t surprise me if we win out at home.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I prefer to give odds at winning a game, rather than just making binary (win/loss) projections
I gave my best shot here: I see us winning 51, give or take 2. 54 would take a perfect storm.
by jksnake99 on Mar 10, 2009 12:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm assuming that was directed at me.
I just added up your % chance to win for the remaining games. You put us at 1120% chance to win the 19 games, which means we should win about 11.2 of them. That puts us right at the 51 you see us winning so your gut/numbers agree with one another.
You have us favored to win 12 more, with 3 tossups. If we win all the games we should, and go 2/3 on the tossups then we get our 54 even without an upset. That is easier said than done though.
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, and that's why just making binary projections doesn't work
If we went with binary projections, the Lakers would be expected to win about 75 games at the beginning of the season.
by jksnake99 on Mar 10, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not even close
That’d mean you have them at 90%+ to win each and every game they play. Let’s simplify with Jscots 4 categories.
Cat 1: Let’s say we give Lakers 95% chance to win these. (I feel you can never give above 95% since if 2 teams play 20 times I see 1 upset for the bad team.)
Cat 2: I don’t think it’s this high, but for benefit of the doubt let’s say 85%.
Cat 3: I don’t give anyone above 85% on the road, even vs losing teams. (Lakers are closer than most here, but even their sick 13-2 doesn’t come that close to 90%)
Cat 4: Road games vs winning teams is hard, no matter who you are. I could honestly only give the Lakers 75% MAX here, even preseason.
Game breaksdown is 21/20/20/21.
1995% + 1700% + 1700% + 1575% = 69.7 wins.
Obviously this is too high of a projection, but like I said, I gave the Lakers what I feel was the benefit of the doubt in every category.
Finally, using this method based on your % chance to win each game actually SUPPORTS your own prediction for our win total. Not sure why you’d argue against it.
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you just agreed with me
I support using % chances, rather than the “that looks like a win, that looks like a loss” approach. I think we are in full agreement.
by jksnake99 on Mar 10, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love your optimism but...
you are being really kind on your predictions. You have the team winning at a 74% clip to finish the season, when so far they have been winning at a 63% clip. On the road you figured a 6-4 record, good for 60% winning percentage, but the team has only won 42% so far, you have even raised their home winning percentage to 89% (8-1) from an already good seasonal percentage of 84%. I would think it is safe to assume that the Blazers will lose a few more than you are suggesting, and end the season with 50 or 51 wins. I can see your predictions happening, but I can also see this team continuing to be inconsistant and lose some games they should win.
by usmcr3049 on Mar 10, 2009 3:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Two factors
1. Quality of opponent the rest of the way is easier than it has been, so past percentages aren’t a good indicator. Adjusting for this (via my spreadsheet) predicts between 52-53 wins.
2. We had bad road losses at Charlotte, OKC, and G.S. while Steve Blake was out. We have not lost that kind of game when he was playing (well, we’ve lost precisely one game like that, at G.S. early in the season while he was playing). He is healthy now, so our road record the rest of the way is likely to be better than it has been previously.
I put us at 53, with an outside shot at as good as 55, and a lower limit of 51. I don’t see us winning fewer than that.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But!
Rudy is out for the next couple :-(
by Zaig on Mar 10, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that could hurt us
Probably not in the next two, but we can sure use him on the road trip.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 10, 2009 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree.
Breaking the games up into catagories, we have:
5 games remaining against sub .500 on the road. The blazers are 10-4 on the season against these teams. So 4-1 is doable, as you said the team is 8-1 in these games with Blake. Going 5-0 would be great, but with this team I would guess at least 1 loss.
3 games remaining against +.500 teams on the road. So far the Blazers are 4-14 in these games, they may get 1 game, but as the games are @ CLE, @ SA, and @ HOU, my guess is they lose all 3.
Only 2 games remaining against sub .500 teams at home, OKC and MEM, Blazers are 16-1 in these games, they should win both.
5 games remaining against +.500 teams at home. The Blazers are 12-4 in these games so far this season, so going 4-1 is more realistic than 5-0. With games against LAL, PHX, UTAH and DEN it would not be out of the question for the Blazers to fall to only 3-2 in these games.
That leaves the team going 10-5 the rest of the way, which is much more likely than blazer91’s project 12-3, giving the Blazers 52 wins and a 5th or 6th seed, which would be an awsome season.
by usmcr3049 on Mar 17, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have a legitimate shot to go 5-0 in those five home games
Philly and Phoenix are both on back-to-backs, and are teams we should beat at home anyway.
Utah is on a back-to-back, and I could forsee a SA/LA like atmosphere. They’ve beat two .500+ teams on the road this year, both teams within two games of .500.
Denver is the last game of the season. The crowd will be at a fever pitch. We won’t lose this game.
The crowd and team will be out for blood against the Lakers with the Ariza/Rudy subplot making things even more frenetic. We won’t lose this one either.
I think we’ll go 7-0 at home, and about 3-5 on the road. 52 wins is a great number. If we beat Indiana and Milwaukee (Greg would help a lot), we could go for 53 wins.
draft dejuan blair
by Cablinasian on Mar 17, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that could happen
But it could also go the other way, Philly plays a style of basketball the Blazers don’t play well against, and the Blazers just broke a long Phoenix winning streak at the RG, those games are not easy wins. Utah is not an easy win either, I think Portland will win, but it is not like they are playing Memphis at home. Same goes for the Denver game, they have more experience and if that game is for the division it would be at best a 50/50 chance of winning.
And while we have beat LA at home this year already, they are the best team in the league for a reason, they beat good teams on the road, just ask Cleveland.
My point is, even if the Blazers do go 10-5 like I suggested, that is 52 wins and an incredible season! Lets not get depressed or upset if they lose a few more than we had hoped.
by usmcr3049 on Mar 17, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LA is also on a back to back
Philly is on a back to back and on their fifth in seven nights. I don’t see us losing that game.
Phoenix? Hard to say. Their style makes it hard to play back to backs, they’ll just be tired. It’s not a short flight from Phoenix, and they have Utah the night before. Tough back to back for them. But Dallas just beat us on a back to back after playing in Phoenix. We should whip them in that circumstance, but they may be coming in on a high after four in a row at home. I think we’ll be ready, Rudy should be healed up by then, Greg should be getting back into rhythm a little bit, and it will be a game that basically seals the playoff spot if we win it beyond all doubt. I think we come out hard and win big.
Utah? They can’t win in Portland, especially not on a back to back. The NY game the night before will be tiring, even if they win big. We get that one.
L.A. plays at home the night before against Denver. That will be a war, because they got whipped at Denver earlier. This time, it will be in L.A., and the Nuggets will be the team on a back to back. L.A. will want that game even more than they want ours the following night. As long as we don’t get caught up in the Ariza revenge thinking, I give us the edge, call it 60-40. That’s by far the most dangerous of those four.
Denver is impossible to call because we don’t know who will need it and who won’t. The team that doesn’t need it will lose to the team that does. If both need it, it’s a war, and home court probably gives us a 60-40 edge.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 18, 2009 2:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
“I don’t agree”.
I said 53. You say 52.
I said a minimum of 51 wins. You expect 4-4 on the road, and either 5-2 or 6-1 at home. 5-2 would make it 51. Sounds like we agree on the floor.
I said an outside shot at 55 wins. You agree we’ve got a chance to go 5-0 against bad teams on the road, and steal one against a good team. You don’t expect it, and neither do I, but it could happen. That 55 win ceiling, if everything clicks, is still potentially there. You can see how it could happen.
I guess you don’t quite agree, but when you say probably 52, and I say probably 53, and we both see potential for a little upside or downside, “I don’t agree” seemed funny to me.
We both agree that if we’d been healthy, we would have hit 55. Probably more, in fact.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 18, 2009 1:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve got us going 5-5 on the road the rest of the way, and 6-2 at home prior to Denver, for a total of 11-7, bringing us to 51-30 heading into April 15. In order to equal that mark, Denver would have to go 11-5 in that same time span, which would set up a showdown for the division title (pending Utah’s record of course). 12-4 might give them the division regardless of the outcome of the last game, unless 3 of those 4 losses are against OKC, Minny, and Utah and we sweep our 3 games against Utah and OKC.
Denver’s remaining schedule:
Wed 11 vs Oklahoma City
Sat 14 vs LA Clippers
Mon 16 vs New Jersey
Wed 18 @ Memphis
Fri 20 vs Washington
Mon 23 @ Phoenix
Wed 25 @ New Orleans
Fri 27 @ Dallas
Sat 28 vs Golden State
Tue 31 vs New York
Thu 02 vs Utah
Sat 04 vs LA Clippers
Sun 05 @ Minnesota
Wed 08 vs Oklahoma City
Thu 09 @ LA Lakers
Mon 13 vs Sacramento
Wed 15 @ Portland
Honestly, it’s hard to see them losing any of the home games with the possible exception of Utah, so that’s 9-1 right there. They only need 3 more on the road to get to that 12-win number, with Memphis and Minny being the logical first two, meaning they only need one of the Dallas/Phoenix/New Orleans trio.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Mar 10, 2009 4:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Which two home games do you think we will lose?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 11, 2009 12:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
likely bets
are two of Utah/Denver/L*kers.
Thought it’s not impossible it could be Dallas or even Phoenix. And don’t forget that we’ve come close to losing at home recently to two pretty terrible teams.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Mar 11, 2009 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Utah/L@kers/Dallas/Phoenix
all come in on a back to back. (You counted Denver as one of the two you think we might lose, but up above you said two before they get here, by the way).
I don’t see us losing more than one of those. I could see getting our second loss to Denver, but would be very surprised if we lost two before that. If we can whip L.A. and S.A. when they aren’t on a back to back, we should be able to beat those four teams when they are.
If we go 5-5 on the road, I expect us to have 52 or even 53 wins by the time Denver shows up.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 11, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think its a little more than optimistic
to think we’ll beat Phoenix, Utah, Denver, and LA at home. We haven’t played the new fast paced Suns, Utah is finally at full strength, and LA will be a fine tuned playoff team by the time April 9th rolls around.
"Respect everyone, fear no one." -TP
by Arby on Mar 17, 2009 9:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
NOT SO MUCH OPTIMISM AS BELIEF
Phoenix is tanking, with only an occasional win blip on the radar, and none against teams of Portland’s caliber, certainly not on the road. (Okay, they won ONE home game against a winning team in March (the Lakers) thanks to the ongoing Shaq vs. Kobe vendetta making Shaq forget he’s old, and one road win in February against Detroit, but EVERYONE wins Sunday afternoon games in Detroit)
Utah and Denver are MUST WINS, and good teams just don’t lose those games at home.
LA causes me concern (which is why I picked us to lose to them earlier this month, but was happy to watch us win), as there are two ways that game could go:
1) LA exacts revenge for the beatdown we laid on them last time they were up here; or
2) The game means way more to Portland than LA (which will have wrapped up best record int he West at that point) and is a fairly easy win against an opponent on cruise control.
I tend to think this is a late season Phil Jackson snoozer, and Portland pulls a comfortable win.
by blazer91 on Mar 17, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phoenix, Utah, and L.A. will all be on back to backs
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 17, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
knowledge bomb!
Thanks, I was not aware of that.
"Respect everyone, fear no one." -TP
by Arby on Mar 17, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Teams can still win on back to backs... some do it consistantly!
by QuebecBlzrFan on Mar 17, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
off the top... ok LA but they are on a losing streak at the RG...
just saying, its not a gimee just because we are at home and they are on B2Bs… ah what am I writting this for! Go Blazers! Win em all!
by QuebecBlzrFan on Mar 17, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, you're right
That doesn’t make it an automatic. But it does help.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Mar 18, 2009 2:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So close tonight!
obviously back to backs are a factor but this is why you can’t take the results for granted!
I hope you are right the rest of the way and that it plays in our favor, we only have 2 more left and I see that you give priority to record when the teams are of different caliber.
Finishing 11-2 will be tough but we are proving to be quite resilient! Hope we get the guys back soon.
by QuebecBlzrFan on Mar 19, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is exactly..
The same as my best case scenario for the blazers. Worst case i see us going 7-8 over the final 15. Right in between 12-3 and 7-8 is where we will probably end up . so a ten and 5 or 9 and 6 stretch seems practical and likely. Losses at Cleveland, Houston and San Antonio being the most likely losses with Utah, Denver and LA all being important and potentially difficult home games. Indiana is the only other game i see us possibly losing.
by Blazerbeav on Mar 17, 2009 5:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
this 4 game homestand is now key
we did what we needed to do on the road trip, now we can’t waste it. 4-0 could put us in the driver’s seat for homecourt, but I wouldn’t get too upset with 3-1 either – they aren’t gimmies.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Mar 21, 2009 10:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Your calls have been brilliant so far
Have to give you credit, after last night’s game you have only been off twice and they balance each other out so we still have the number of wins you predicted to date.
I think that 54 is still high but we will be close. Hope that home finale against Denver game is for the division win or just to rub their noses in it if we already clinched. I am still one of those who will be happy if they keep playing hard each night so even if we don’t win the division I will be pumped for the playoffs!
by QuebecBlzrFan on Mar 22, 2009 8:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
