What's new

Study done on whether preseason success is a predictor of regular season success

How much is that correlation due to influx of a high, ready to play, draft pick?

Jazz don't have that.

What's the correlation to coaching changes?

Rookies almost never have massive effect on the win total of their teams. I posted about a nice ESPN article about it a while ago that summarized it pretty well:
https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?32535

The "NBA ready" rookies who help you "win now" are to a huge extent a myth. It usually takes 2-3 seasons for the rookies to start becoming serious contributors.
 
So predicting more or less than 23.5 wins for this team is truly a gamble?

Not necessarily. Based on after-2009 data, the average win total of all teams winning less than 30 games is 23.7. The following year the average wins for those teams is 30.9. Use your discretion to decide whether any particular less-than-30-win team will be above or below the 7-win gain average for the following year.
 
So predicting more or less than 23.5 wins for this team is truly a gamble?

Starting with the 2001-2 regular season, 74 teams have won less than 30 games (or lockout equivalent). Their average win total the following year is 8.84 games higher. This breaks down as follows:

30+ more wins, 2 teams
20-29 more wins, 10 teams
15-19 more wins, 10 teams
10-14 more wins, 9 teams
5-9 more wins, 14 teams
0-4 more wins, 18 teams
1-5 more losses, 6 teams
6-10 more losses, 3 teams
more than 10 more losses, 2 teams

If you do the same thing starting with the 2009-regular season, you get:
29 total teams
7.16 average wins more the following year
Breakdown:
30+ more wins, 0 teams
20-29 more wins, 3 teams
15-19 more wins, 2 teams
10-14 more wins, 5 teams
5-9 more wins, 4 teams
0-4 more wins, 12 teams
1-5 more losses, 3 teams
6-10 more losses, 0 teams
more than 10 more losses, 0 teams
 
Wins and losses during the preseason was never a predictor of our regular season record when the Jazz had Karl and John, so why should we think it has relevance now? However, I do believe that the changes Quin implemented for the preseason -- as shown by our improved offense and defense -- will have a positive impact on our regular season record. Will we win more than 40 games? Probably not, but 40 wins doesn't seem so far fetched now.
 
I'm almost certain I've underestimated what this team can do. They look half decent. Then again, last pre-season got my hopes up for Kanter and then he took a dump on them.
 
Wins and losses during the preseason was never a predictor of our regular season record when the Jazz had Karl and John, so why should we think it has relevance now?

Veteran teams approach the pre-season much differently than a team like the present day Jazz. On vet teams veterans use the pre-season to get themselves into game shape (although Malone was probably in game shape 365 days a year) while 6 or 7 guys fight for 1 or 2 roster spots. W's & L's mean little to nothing because you're dealing with a known quantity.

Now we have a young team and a new coach who is essentially a doctor injecting a new serum into the franchise (to counter act Tyrone Corbin's full blown AIDs-like affliction on the team). And the reaction has been mostly positive. It could very well mean nothing and it could mean something - right now I'm leaning towards something.
 
Seems like a bad indicator because it depends on who you play in the preseason. Are you playing veteran teams that aren't really trying, or young teams who are trying?
 


Good post. Two years ago when the wheels fell off for the Kobe/Dwight Lakers, the Lakers were 0-8 in the pre-season. Everyone was saying, "Don't worry. It's just pre-season," but then it carried into the regular season and they were below .500 until the final month.

The Jazz are showing they can score points, share the ball, play defense and rack up rebounds. It bodes well.
 
Back
Top