i listened to spencer hall's saturday show yesterday and he was sharing a pretty good breakdown someone did for his site, using vegas odds to project which games the jazz had to have to win to get to 45, 50, 55 wins. his hypothesis is that it takes 48-55 to qualify. (for the record i disagree; the more good-but-not-great teams there are, that drives down win totals across the board. if more teams win 35+ games, then some teams in the high 40s have to drop - it's zero-sum, after all.)
but even if we buy that 48-55 is the key in, this study says that we're only off track by one game.
translation: we've mostly lost games we should have lost. it is hard to feel that way when we've been in games like @mem and @phi, but really, using just about any model, those are teams that should be able to beat the jazz at home.
dal - should have won
@noh - probably the one game we lost that should have been a win
@sas - should have lost
@mem - should have lost
lal - honestly, you could argue we should have lost this one but we caught a team in the middle of turmoil
@den - should have lost
phx - should have won
@tor - should have won
@bos - should have lost
@phi - could have won it, but honestly should have lost
@was - should have won
even if we factor bynum's injury in (which vegas wouldn't have) and call @phi a "should have won", we still have lakers win which probably could have gone either way, per vegas. so we'll be fine. if we didn't lay an egg in NOH, we'd be a very acceptable 5-5. we all said before the season started that as long as utah hung around the .500 mark by early december, the piper will pay them back with home games after that.
Thanks for sharing the breakdown.
By the way, what did you disagree with?
Cy is a Baker, he doesn't work fast food. Don't make that mistake, he doesn't like it.