[Smith] The Boston Celtics are on pace to lead the NBA with 58 wins. If no one wins 60 games, it will be the first time since 2000-01 that no team wins at least 60 games in a full 82-game season. 2000-01 is the only time in the last 44 seasons that no team won as many as 60 games.
Related to this:
The NBA is in their 56th season since switching to an 82-game schedule. Four seasons were disrupted due to lockouts and the pandemic.
In 52 82-game seasons (including this one) only seven have had no 60-win seasons:
68-69
73-74
75-76
76-77
77-78
78-79
00-01— Keith Smith (@KeithSmithNBA) February 17, 2023
by Brady331
22 Comments
Wow. That is an interesting stat alongside how crazy offense has been this season.
Related to this:
The NBA is in their 56th season since switching to an 82-game schedule. Four seasons were disrupted due to lockouts and the pandemic.
In 52 82-game seasons \(including this one\) only seven have had no 60-win seasons:
68-69
73-74
75-76
76-77
77-78
78-79
00-01
https://twitter.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/1626591692676820995
How the fuck did the warriors win 73 games dude. That shit will never be broken.
It’s literally wide open this year
Scrub league
They or Milwaukee will get 60 because of the race for first in the east is gonna be insane
If you go by winning percentage, technically in 2020-21 no team had a percentage equivalent to 60 wins in a full season (.732). The best record that year was the 52-20 Jazz whose percentage extrapolates to 59-23
The Celtics and Bucks are on pace for 58 wins, and the Nuggets are on pace for 57 wins. It seems likely that one of them will pick up the pace and get to 60.
We see this a lot in preseason projections–no one is projected to hit 50+ HR despite that often happening, or no one projected to win 60 games despite that often happenening.
But just because no individual team/player is projected to hit that mark does not mean that they’re projecting *no one* to hit it. Some will overperform projections/pace, while others will underperform.
NBA parity was fun before KD ruined it again
4 teams race for the 1st seed will create at least 1, imo probably 2 or 3 60 + teams.
As a byproduct, this race will also determine the MVP
Do y’all think this is a result of parity or teams being more liberal with rest days for players?
I was actually looking at some of the net rating data recently, because someone mentioned that Boston’s net rating was pretty low for a league-leading record.
[This graph is the net ratings](https://imgur.com/a/cg3LbcK) by team ranking for the last 10 seasons, with the current season bolded. x-axis is team ranking 1-30, and y-axis is net rating. It’s pretty striking how flat this season is, particularly around the 15-25 range.
The Spurs were the top team in 2001, winning 58. Then you had the Lakers, Kings (not yet with Bibby), Mavericks (young Dirk) and even Jazz (last decent season of Malone/Stockton) **within five games** of them. And then there were the Sixers and Bucks from the East in that mid-50 win range.
And after all that, the Lakers go 15-1 in the postseason.
But yet are the clear favorites to win the title IMO.
In my heart the Knicks can still get there
There’s your parity
You could argue they are pacing 60+ given that they don’t have to face the Magic again.
i know this may be my homer-ism but uhhhhh nuggets gonna get that.
We started slow through injuries and we are hitting our stride.
Lets just see if Tatum does his usual post all star breakout
Don’t worry, the nuggets are just getting started
Parity has never been better but the speed of the game and the amount of rest people take certainly has something to do with this imo
I think since the number of games played has not been equal in several seasons. That winning percentage is a better indicator of parity. Has there been a season where every team was below .712.