Which is still a fine achievement if they get it given the circumstances
SandyMandy17
I have us pretty spot on 44.5 if we have no break outs and just play with a healthy chet + people stop benching stars against us
If literally anyone breaks out we will blow 44.5 away though
JeremiahPhantom
If we can stay healthy and be at least .500, I’ll be content.
The west is stacked and if we can get a good sample size of what we have, then Presti and co would be in a better position to start adding/swapping any pieces we need for the 24-25 season.
Dhr7468
Hollinger said that? Wild he’s normally so bullish on the Thunder. /s
LG-SpaceCowboy
I’d take the under but not by much. Like 43 wins
CurrentJoke579
Anybody know any good betting sites?
aBurgerFlippinSecond
I think the biggest factor in our win total this year lies within 2 players: Chet Holmgren, and Vasilije Micic. Chet adds value defending around the rim which is crucial down the stretch of close games (43 “clutch time” games last year, we only won 17) and Micic showed he was a spectacular spot-up shooter in Europe with solid playmaking abilities. If those two are who we think they are, those clutch wins numbers should swing closer to 60% winning vs 40% winning last year. 12 game swing brings our record last year to 46-36, and none of this takes into account the development of SGA, Dort, Giddey, or JDub.
AnkitPancakes
Fair, i think 43 wins is where we will sit
Breezgoat
“Put another way, barring a major breakout, nobody else on this team would be the fourth-best player on Cleveland. It’s tough to win big that way, especially since the bench is nothing special either.”
This seems like a stretch?
blacksoxing
I think my biggest question is this: is Chet going to be a true two-way star, or a defensive wizard? If he’s just good for his defense then someone gotta be ready to score 20 a game. Could be Giddey, but for damn sure can’t be a bunch of 15’s.
the_mad_
I am not smart enough to make any solid prediction. (I am just a casual fan.) But, in my opinion, we have more ways to improve than regress since we have a large number of young players and first years who can get better but not get worse. It is inevitable that some players will do better than expected and others will do worse. Predicting who does which is impossible but the odds are in our favor that overall we will improve, because there are more ways to improve than to get worse.
Further win total is quite vulnerable to luck. Just because the thunder got unlucky last year (they should have won more games if I recall correctly) does not mean they will get lucky this year. But it does call into question whether we should be using last year as a baseline, though. Regression to the mean is a thing.
ymi17
It’s quite hard to go from 40 to 50 wins. We could be much much better (and win a playoff series) and still only win 42 games.
We aren’t getting a team’s bench mob as starters as often in 2023.
Sherkok_Homes
Hollinger has always hated us
la_flameeee
He’s probably right. The west is very deep. We are still so young
ivspodcast
For everyone saying fair, please look at what his predictions for us last year were lol
16 Comments
Opening Paragraph: ” At first glance, this does not look like an obvious under candidate. Ye Ole Narrative is strong with this one: Oklahoma City won 40 games with a positive point differential last season despite not having [Chet Holmgren](https://theathletic.com/nba/player/chet-holmgren-sbpm1Ty4vmeY5sa9/) all year, plus the rest of the roster is very young, and there’s a clear tentpole superstar in [Shai Gilgeous-Alexander](https://theathletic.com/nba/player/shai-gilgeous-alexander-Ghni3y9TrL9rBSl5/). Is it really that difficult to see them push it to 45? “
Which is still a fine achievement if they get it given the circumstances
I have us pretty spot on 44.5 if we have no break outs and just play with a healthy chet + people stop benching stars against us
If literally anyone breaks out we will blow 44.5 away though
If we can stay healthy and be at least .500, I’ll be content.
The west is stacked and if we can get a good sample size of what we have, then Presti and co would be in a better position to start adding/swapping any pieces we need for the 24-25 season.
Hollinger said that? Wild he’s normally so bullish on the Thunder. /s
I’d take the under but not by much. Like 43 wins
Anybody know any good betting sites?
I think the biggest factor in our win total this year lies within 2 players: Chet Holmgren, and Vasilije Micic. Chet adds value defending around the rim which is crucial down the stretch of close games (43 “clutch time” games last year, we only won 17) and Micic showed he was a spectacular spot-up shooter in Europe with solid playmaking abilities. If those two are who we think they are, those clutch wins numbers should swing closer to 60% winning vs 40% winning last year. 12 game swing brings our record last year to 46-36, and none of this takes into account the development of SGA, Dort, Giddey, or JDub.
Fair, i think 43 wins is where we will sit
“Put another way, barring a major breakout, nobody else on this team would be the fourth-best player on Cleveland. It’s tough to win big that way, especially since the bench is nothing special either.”
This seems like a stretch?
I think my biggest question is this: is Chet going to be a true two-way star, or a defensive wizard? If he’s just good for his defense then someone gotta be ready to score 20 a game. Could be Giddey, but for damn sure can’t be a bunch of 15’s.
I am not smart enough to make any solid prediction. (I am just a casual fan.) But, in my opinion, we have more ways to improve than regress since we have a large number of young players and first years who can get better but not get worse. It is inevitable that some players will do better than expected and others will do worse. Predicting who does which is impossible but the odds are in our favor that overall we will improve, because there are more ways to improve than to get worse.
Further win total is quite vulnerable to luck. Just because the thunder got unlucky last year (they should have won more games if I recall correctly) does not mean they will get lucky this year. But it does call into question whether we should be using last year as a baseline, though. Regression to the mean is a thing.
It’s quite hard to go from 40 to 50 wins. We could be much much better (and win a playoff series) and still only win 42 games.
We aren’t getting a team’s bench mob as starters as often in 2023.
Hollinger has always hated us
He’s probably right. The west is very deep. We are still so young
For everyone saying fair, please look at what his predictions for us last year were lol