Forecasts for the regular season in the Eastern Conference and Western Conference have been posted. Now it’s time to take a stab at the post-season. Assuming the regular season forecasts are correct (so we are already starting off badly), here is how I see the playoffs unfolding (and additionally, my pick for MVP).
The Eastern Conference Playoffs
1. Boston Celtics
2. Chicago Bulls
3. Cleveland Cavaliers or Detroit Pistons
4. A team from the Southeast who gets to lose to the Cavaliers or Pistons in the first-round
5. Detroit Pistons or Cleveland Cavaliers
6-8. Three teams, none of which will be in Milwaukee, who get to lose in the first round.
As I said in the forecast of the Eastern Conference, the East has two great teams, two good teams, and ten teams that are bunched together. And then Milwaukee.
Once you get past the first round, it will be Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, and Detroit. Boston and Chicago should come out of the second round with Boston advancing to the NBA Finals.
The Western Conference Playoffs
1. San Antonio
2. Dallas
3. Phoenix
4. Utah
5. Houston
6. New Orleans
7. Denver
8. LA Lakers
San Antonio, Dallas, and Phoenix are pretty close but I am going to give the slight edge to San Antonio. The Mavericks signing of Juwan Howard doesn’t help. Juwan Howard, as noted previously, has never been a productive player. And his signing might be enough to let the Spurs take the number one seed. Or maybe not. Again, the top three in the West are pretty even.
Although this trio is better than the remainder of the field, the teams listed after the top three in the West are still pretty good. And this means that unlike Boston and Chicago, the top teams in the West are going to be challenged in each round of the playoffs. In fact, at least one team in the top three can’t make the Western Conference Finals, and it would not surprise me if two (or all three) don’t make it that far.
That being said, I think the Suns lack of depth catches up to them in the post-season. So the Western Conference Finals will be Spurs vs. Mavericks.
Predicting the Finals
So who makes the Finals? I would like to see Celtics vs. Mavericks. Basically I would like to see both Dirk Nowitzki and Kevin Garnett vindicated after careers of excellent play without excellent results for their respective teams.
But I am going to pick, Celtics and Spurs, with the Celtics ultimately prevailing. Is this what Wins Produced indicates? Well, kind of. At least, I can play with the minutes on each team and get that result. The difference in these teams is not so great that one can be this definitive.
My answer is not so much about Wins Produced, but rather about VIBE magazine and Bill Simmons.
As I noted a couple of weeks ago, the November issue of VIBE magazine has a very hip article on the impact Kevin Garnett will have on the Celtics. Seeing this article in VIBE (okay, I wrote it) has made me sort of a Celtics fan (at least for this season). This is a bit odd, since I grew up hating the Celtics (since I follow the Pistons).
Although my writing for VIBE has altered my sympathies a bit, the writing of Simmons has also impacted my pick for NBA champion.
Simmons declared the following in the May 21st issue of ESPN the Magazine:
Fifty years from now, some stat geek will crunch numbers from Duncan’s era and come to the conclusion that Kevin Garnett was just as good. And he’ll be wrong. No NBA team that featured a healthy Duncan would have missed the playoffs for three straight years. It’s an impossibility.
In response to this I wrote, in a post titled “Speeding Up Time For Bill Simmons“: Not to assume the label of “state geek”, but had Simmons sent this article to me directly, he could have seen 50 years go by in a few minutes.
I went on to note that one can indeed argue – via the statistics — that Kevin Garnett is just as good as Tim Duncan. People perceive a difference, though, because Duncan has been surrounded by good players in his career and KG basically hasn’t.
Since Simmons made his argument about Duncan and KG, the Celtics – the team Simmons follows – has acquired Garnett. Given this acquisition, I would like to see the Celtics – with Garnett – defeat Tim Duncan and the Spurs in the NBA Finals.
Can this happen? Certainly. Will it happen? Well, we will have to see.
But if it does happen, what will Simmons and others say about KG? Will Garnett suddenly be recognized as the best player in the NBA (as he has been many of the years he played in Minnesota)? In other words, will we see the Simmons perspective on KG change if Garnett leads his Celtics to a title? I don’t know the answer to these questions, but I would love to find out.
Predicting the Most Valuable Player
Speaking of the best, who will be MVP in 2008? Awards are difficult to forecast because they are not always about actual production, but rather the media’s perception of production. Still, given that I have a working paper on the voting for the MVP in the NBA, I am going to try and predict the MVP in 2008.
From my research with Aju Fenn (economics professor at Colorado College) we have learned that the MVP generally goes to the leading scorer – or player most responsible for scoring (i.e. Steve Nash) – on a top team. We know the top teams: Boston, Chicago, San Antonio, Dallas, and Phoenix. Given this list, all we need to do is identify the offensive stars on each squad.
Boston: Kevin Garnett
Chicago: Luol Deng or Ben Gordon
San Antonio: Tim Duncan
Dallas: Dirk Nowitzki
Phoenix: Steve Nash or Shawn Marion
The NBA has more than 400 players, so to have a list of just seven names is a good start. Let’s narrow this down further.
Nowitzki is eliminated before the season even begins. The Mavericks collapse in the playoffs is attributed, at least partially, to him. And he can’t redeem himself before the playoffs next year so I can’t see the media selecting him as MVP in 2008.
Moving on…I think Chicago will not be as good as the other teams on the list. Plus neither Gordon nor Deng will be that prolific as scorers. So those two are eliminated.
Shawn Marion is a top scorer, but past voting has indicated that Nash gets much of the credit for Marion’s points production.
So now we are down to three players: Garnett, Duncan, or Nash.
One can make a plausible argument for all three. But I think the resurgence in Boston is going to make Garnett the story of 2007-08. So I think he gets the award.
Now will Garnett be the most productive player (i.e. leader in Wins Produced)? Last year the most productive player was Jason Kidd. But Kidd ain’t no kid anymore, so maybe Garnett can once again rise to the top of the rankings. Of course, “The Kid” ain’t a kid anymore either. Given the age of these two, one might want to keep an eye on Dwight Howard, Carlos Boozer, Steve Nash, and David Lee.
Okay, enough on the MVP. Tomorrow I am going to talk about the rookies. That post will reveal my choice for both Rookie of the Year and the Most Productive Rookie. And no, these are not the same player.
– DJ
For a discussion of other teams see NBA Team Reviews: 2006-07
Our research on the NBA was summarized HERE.
The equation connecting wins to offensive/defensive efficiency is given HERE
Wins Produced and Win Score are discussed in the following posts
Simple Models of Player Performance
What Wins Produced Says and What It Does Not Say
Wages of Wins Journal 
Paulo
October 31, 2007
“But if it does happen, what will Simmons and others say about KG?” — dberri
Of course. If Roger Clemens signed with the Red Sox last year, he might have tried to erase all evidence of his hate towards Clemens. Simmons is blindly loyal to his teams, and as much as I enjoy his writing, that loyalty can be too much for some.
I agree on the KG for MVP prediction. One contention that Simmons made before was that KG wasn’t “clutch”. I don’t know if you have tried to look in “close and late” situations but in the few close games that I saw KG in (small sample size and casual observation alert), he was umm, to put it nicely, well defended in those situations. With Pierce and Allen around to keep defenses somewhat honest, it somewhat nullifies the said weakness.
Rashad
October 31, 2007
I was wondering what you thought of Simmons’ preseason predictions column. He seems to buck a lot of the conventional wisdom (and wins produced wisdom) but I guess when you look at his injury predictions they mostly make sense.
Have you looked into the idea of players as injury prone? I mean, if the probability of injury was completely random, we would still see some players with serious injuries two, three times in their career. The question is does it happen more often than the baseline rate of serious injury in the league would indicate?
Since injuries are THE excuse, if you could factor in an injury probability for players, that would be interesting.
Ryan Schwan
October 31, 2007
I love how you keep killing Milwaukee. First you call them boring, and now that they suck. The “none of which will be Milwaukee” and “and then Milwaukee” lines are priceless. Their fans must hate you, if any of them are still reading this site. :)
I have a feeling that if the Cavaliers snag that third seed that LeBron James will be included in that final list of three for MVP consideration.
Tim
October 31, 2007
Do I detect some wishful thinking? Some desire for vindication? Or just some sympathy for Garnett? Be careful, or you might be accused of losing your statistician’s objectivity. ;-)
I’m sorry, but as great as Garnett is, he can’t win it alone. Which of course has been your point all these years. But I do look forward to seeing the Bulls and Celtics battle it out. And if the Celtics do win, well, the Bulls are young.
By the way, I am old enough to remember how Jordan was perceived before Pippen and Grant came along. He went from “ballhog” to “greatest ever” mighty quickly. But Garnett’s support this year is not as great as Jordan’s in his championship years. Nor, I’m afraid, is Garnett’s support as great as Duncan’s this year.
SWaN
October 31, 2007
Last year Simmons predicted Raps would win 22 games. They won 47. This year he predicts 39 wins. So I think he is consistent in underestimating.
Simmons also demonstrated with his NFL picks that his wife did better at random picks. This year she is still out performing him.
I think he is a good humorist, but a poor analyst.
Jason
October 31, 2007
At least the total number of wins and losses Simmons is predicting are equal. I’ve seen several league wide predictors where this is not true. Somehow, teams are winning games without someone else losing.
Nephtuli
November 1, 2007
On the Duncan vs. Garnett question, how do you take into account the player’s defense? Statistically all we have are blocks and steals, but there is much more to defense, especially on the ball defense. So does Wins Produced take into account a player’s man-to-man defense? And since Duncan has such a stellar reputation as a defender, couldn’t that put him over the top?
Paul
December 4, 2007
Is this writer from a Chicago area? When did Bulls become such a high caliber team that it gets compared to teams like Dallas Phoenix and Spurs?? I know you wrote this Pre-season before chicago’s 4-11 start, but remember they got swept by detroit last year.. and you put chicago in 2nd place in playoff run.. what a joke….