Take the best player out from each team [Archive]

jmill

12-11-2009, 10:50 PM

Celtics. At first thought I would say LA, but the offense becomes stagnant when Kobe isn't in the game. As good as Pau is offensively, the team really benefits from the amount of attention Kobe demands when he has the ball in his hands. The C's though, are just extremely balanced all around.

badfish22

12-11-2009, 10:52 PM

Celtics.

They can still beat most top teams without KG.

Pierce is the best player on that team imo.

At least he was in their finals run.

But celtics I agree.

Rondo, Allen and KG can carry the team.

mavs>spurs2

12-11-2009, 10:54 PM

Nuggets. You replace a one dimensional All star with an all-round superstar in Balkman :smokin

Melo is an all around beast this year man

Chieflion

12-11-2009, 11:03 PM

The Knicks. Cause they don't have a best player.

badfish22

12-11-2009, 11:06 PM

The Knicks. Cause they don't have a best player.

Sons, they didn't need one in New Orleans tonight :lmao

Chieflion

12-11-2009, 11:09 PM

Sons, they didn't need one in New Orleans tonight :lmao
Don't laugh. They are on a roll. 4 straight wins.

Allanon

12-11-2009, 11:12 PM

Pierce is the best player on that team imo.

At least he was in their finals run.

But celtics I agree.

Rondo, Allen and KG can carry the team.

Yeah, Pierce/KG are inter-changeable. I think KG brings more team defense but Pierce is clutch.

I think the Celtics are the only team with 3 guys who could be #1 players...Ray Allen is on the low end of #1 guys but he's pretty clutch too and very competitive.

badfish22

12-11-2009, 11:14 PM

Don't laugh. They are on a roll. 4 straight wins.

Just sayin, they didn't need a "best player" (who i think is Al Harrigton)

This is more of a :lmao on the Jazz. That first rounder might not be what that thought it would, if the Knicks can keep this up.

Kai

12-11-2009, 11:51 PM

Haha, you'd actually be adding a player to the Rockets.

The Franchise

12-11-2009, 11:54 PM

Haha, you'd actually be adding a player to the Rockets.

Exactly.

baseline bum

12-12-2009, 12:00 AM

LA easily. Fisher/Artest/Odom/Gasol/Bynum would be at worst a top 5 NBA starting lineup compared to the rest of the league with its stars.

jesterbobman

12-12-2009, 12:02 AM

Houston(Yao as best player), Detroit(Stuckey, Gordon, Rip, Prince?, no clear cut #1), Boston(Without Garnett/Pierce), Clippers(Griffin, Camby, Baron?), Magic(No Dwight, but have big man depth now).

Basically, any team without a clear cut #1 that has depth to cover it, Like how the Jazz can cover Boozer with Millsap.

DaDakota

12-12-2009, 12:05 AM

Rockets....for crying out loud we are 13-9 and have played the toughest schedule and are without our TWO best players.

DD

poop

12-12-2009, 12:06 AM

Suns would be a 40-win team, at best.

suns already are a 40 win team.

probably the celtics. take away any one player and they are still damn good cause they are such a good TEAM.

take away Kobe and the lakers are good but nowhere near as deadly. they become FAR more beatable.

baseline bum

12-12-2009, 12:18 AM

LA could run a triple-tower lineup that would murder on the glass. They'd still have two all-star bigmen to punish teams inside, and they'd still be really good defensively. I could see Boston if we were talking about the Rasheed of a couple of years ago, but not the one who has looked bad and out of shape all season so far.

ElNono

12-12-2009, 12:21 AM

Carslile said that if Dallas loses JJ Barea, they're tanking the season...

The Franchise

12-12-2009, 12:49 AM

Rockets....for crying out loud we are 13-9 and have played the toughest schedule and are without our TWO best players.

DD

We are playing so well without them, that the people never seem to come to the realization that we already are without our best player(s). I don't think anyone would be doing better than us minus their best player, and facing our schedule. Take out their second best player and most of these teams would be facing the lottery.

jonnybravo

12-12-2009, 03:19 AM

Boston

Darthkiller

12-12-2009, 03:25 AM

portland

Chieflion

12-12-2009, 03:28 AM

portland
You really think a team with Aldridge as a go-to guy, shit, I am laughing already, will be the best out of all 30 teams in the league with their best player out?

23LeBronJames23

12-12-2009, 03:40 AM

Celtics & LA

Ghazi

12-12-2009, 05:07 AM

I'd say Celtics. Kobe is far more important to the Lakers than KG is to the Celtics. Celtics would still have multiple players that could take over a game...honestly I think the only such player on the Lakers is Kobe.

I think KG is still the best player on that team as far as overall impact, although he hardly amazes you with his statistics anymore.

mystargtr34

12-12-2009, 07:37 AM

Lakers or Boston.

Boston because there three best players are all pretty equal contributors.

Lakers because they are so damn stacked behind Kobe, and have a post presence who you can run an offense through.

I would probly say LA.

Balance

12-12-2009, 09:23 AM

That's easy. Celtics (but maybe they would need Big Baby).
On paper, I don't think anybody would bet on the Rockets, but they like to prove people wrong, don't they?

Nuggets. You replace a one dimensional All star with an all-round superstar in Balkman :smokin

Yeah, sure... Good luck with that...

pauls931

12-12-2009, 10:42 AM

Boston.

IronMexican

12-12-2009, 11:25 AM

Rockets....for crying out loud we are 13-9 and have played the toughest schedule and are without our TWO best players.

DD

Addition my subtraction

IM

lil_penny

12-12-2009, 11:28 AM

We can't afford to lose another player lol

exstatic

12-12-2009, 11:47 AM

Celtics.

They can still beat most top teams without KG.

KG isn't their best player. Pussy boy doesn't even want the rock in the 4th.

Pierce is the man in Bean Town.

Culburn369

12-12-2009, 11:50 AM

Rondo is their best player.

exstatic

12-12-2009, 12:11 PM

Rondo is their fourth best player.

Culburn369

12-12-2009, 12:13 PM

:rolleyes

noob cake

12-12-2009, 12:20 PM

Celtics, then Rockets.

Go ahead take away one of Ariza/Brooks/Scola

Native American

12-12-2009, 12:53 PM

With herds of wild buffalo, biggest and strongest bulls are easiest to kill with arrow. Buffalo has come to know this so big and strong bulls push weakest bulls out into open field when they run. Those biggest and strongest bulls use their instinct for survival against those weak bulls. And when I say "biggest and strongest bulls" I mean Kevin Garnett. And when I say "weak bulls" I mean small white or European point guards. And when I say "use their instinct for survival" I mean "act like a complete and total bitch ass." Without the bitch-assness of the big and strong bulls, herds of wild buffalo actually survive better as herd. Houston Rockets do best without their biggest and strongest bitch, I mean bull.

JamStone

12-12-2009, 05:19 PM

Houston really is making a pretty good case without Yao and T-Mac, but I don't think they can keep this pace up throughout the season and I don't think they're legit contenders in the west. But now that Boston picked up Sheed, if KG (and I know it's arguable that KG is the best player over Paul Pierce) goes down, I think the Celtics would still be one of the top contenders in the east. If it's Pierce that goes down, the Celtics would probably feel it more because his back-ups are Marquis Daniels and Tony Allen. But they'd still probably a top 3 or 4 team in the east.