Page 1 of 1

Underachievers

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2016 12:08 am
by kucoach7
Nathan Sliver here with sevenfortyseven.com. Over the past couple of seasons I have done some exploring in the realms of underachievers and overachievers. I'll discuss teams in this article but I plan on expanding to players eventually. How do I define an over/under-achieving team? Well, that is a tricky question. The data I use only has the final team roster, which doesn't tell me how long that roster was together so I can't really use wins. So, I resort to number of playoff series won, which should be congruent with the final make-up of the roster. I also only base the predictions on player attributes of the top nine players on the roster. I use poisson regression and a bunch of other stuff you guys don't really care about to produce predicted series wins. Finally, I require a team to have at least two underachieving seasons within the same team generation (as subjectively defined by me). I don't want to just find teams that ran into a bad upset in the first round of the playoffs.

Overachievers
It turns out this is so uninteresting I'm not really going to go into it. The list was predictable. Balls's first, third, and fourth championships were up there (whoopdedoo, another indicator balls is a better than everyone else) and the Suns surprise championship made up 4 of the top 5.

Underachievers
6. The Dirk and Dirk Fallout Blazers
2002: #20 worst underachieving season
2005: #12
The 2002 Blazers are one of the great mysteries of the PBSL somehow a team led by Shaq, Dirk, and the Glove missed the playoffs entirely. When the Blazers dumped those stars the return players were good enough (Kandi, Zo, Big Dog, Starbury, Butler) to earn their own spot in the Hall of Shame when they missed the playoffs in 2005.

5. The Kidd/Garnett Lakers???
2000: #11
2001: #15
The Kidd/Garnett Lakers were so good anytime they didn't win the championship, they severely underachieved. With defensive stalwarts like Larry Hughes and Bruce Bowen teaming up with the dynamic duo and Balls master game planning, it really is surprising Balls doesn't have even more rings.

4. The Camby, Popeye, T-Mac, Daniels Kings
1998: #19
2000: #3
This team had it all. The superstar, one of the best front courts in the game and "supporting casts" including guys like Dee Brown and Stacy Augmon. Ultimately T-Mac just wasn't ready yet. A classic case of not getting the timelines just right.

3. The Jamison/Miller Mavs
2000: #2
2004: #14
This team was another case of not getting the timing quite right. In 2000 Jamison and Miller were a little raw but paired with Donyell Marshall and Robot Pack. In 2004 they were ready to lead and teamed up with Camby but the support cast just wasn't good enough.

2. The Zo Celtics - The Later Years
1996: #5
1999: #6
Another team so good, they underachieved every time they didn't win a championship. The 96 team was stacked with Zo, DC, Donyell, Kukoc, Richmond, and Bimbo but they ran into a HOT Wizards team in the second round. The 99 team also featured nice pieces around Zo with Francis, Brandon, Christie, and Cliff Robinson. This time they go upended by an overachieving Heat team.

1. The Zo Sonics
2001: #1
2002: #9
Zo and Donyell show up on this list a few times. This time they team up with Jim Jackson! and Jalen Rose! yet somehow come in fourth! in the Pacific and Kemped in the playoffs. Easily the worst underachieving season in PBSL history. The 2002 Darth reload brought the enemy in house by pairing the two of the three greatest big men in league history, Zo and Kemp. With Van Exel distributing the team had high hopes only to see them dashed by the killer SAR, Glenn Robinson, Ray Allen trio.

Re: Underachievers

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2016 11:42 am
by Conroy
Good article. I totally agree with that 1999 team, but the 96 team Zo got hurt in game 5 which we still won and had a 3-2 lead, but yes it's underacheiving when a 67 win team loses in first round of playoffs. Also I'd say Zo's rookie years team definitely over acheived a 47 win team that made it to finals and took a better Lakers team to 7 games who also lost my starting PF around game 5 with a 3-2 lead.

Re: Underachievers

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2016 3:14 pm
by kucoach7
Conroy wrote:Good article. I totally agree with that 1999 team, but the 96 team Zo got hurt in game 5 which we still won and had a 3-2 lead, but yes it's underacheiving when a 67 win team loses in first round of playoffs. Also I'd say Zo's rookie years team definitely over acheived a 47 win team that made it to finals and took a better Lakers team to 7 games who also lost my starting PF around game 5 with a 3-2 lead.
Yeah, I wrote this late at night and forgot to check on injuries.

Re: Underachievers

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2016 7:16 pm
by PaulyP
Would love to see the entire list
Good stuff nonetheless as always