View Full Version : Consesus prediction: 4-5 in West
analyzed
10-24-2010, 04:17 AM
The predictions are out , and both CNNSI (4.3) and Espn (4 -5) have the Spurs ranging from 4th to 5th best in thw west. This is the lowest projections I've seen in the Tim Duncan era. Which brings up the consesus belief that the Spurs yes are a good team but not good enough.
Which really puts the status of the spurs and TP's freeagent in a real dilleme. You have to wonder why would the Spurs pay big money (close to max) if it dosen't put them over the hump from being just good to championship contenders? And neither does loosing him , drop the Spurs into the lottery.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2010/news/story?page=Predictions1011-Spurs
CNNSI : Scout : behind enemy lines
""When I hear rumors of Parker leaving the Spurs, I don't think it has as much to do with the improvement of Hill as it has to do with improvement of Ginobili in the pick-and-roll. In those situations, Ginobili is basically the point guard and Hill is the guy who can spot up and shoot with much better range than Parker. But it's because Ginobili is the one making the plays and tilting the defense, and that makes Parker somewhat redundant.
I haven't seen a drop-off in Parker as long as he's been healthy. There was a time when everyone was raving about the way he'd developed his shooting. But the truth is he's still not a good shooter. That said, Parker will have a lot of teams interested in him as a free agent next summer. Unless Hill has a setback, I just don't see them being able to afford to keep Parker."
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/basketball/nba/10/11/spurs.scouts.preview/index.html#ixzz13GYE253O
Read more:
DrSteffo
10-24-2010, 04:47 AM
Oh no another trade Parker thread? Rrreallllly?
Spurs Brazil
10-24-2010, 07:14 AM
Last season they all put us as the 2nd best in the west and we finished 7. I think if we stay healthy we can get home court for the 1st round
Last season they all put us as the 2nd best in the west and we finished 7. I think if we stay healthy we can get home court for the 1st round
Analysts are fickle in the first place. Only concerned with "what have you done for me lately". That's why I don't put much stock in these pre-season rankings.
When the Spurs added Jefferson and Dice last summer, all the analysts put us back at the top of the pile based on the fact that those two were coming off strong seasons with different teams, and the Spurs were only a season removed as defending champions from 2007.
Now, the Spurs have those same pieces (which were regarded as very good last summer), plus they've added some other good players (Splitter, Anderson) and lost some deadweight (Mason, Bogans). But all the analysts remember is Jefferson underachieving, and the Spurs getting swept by Phoenix.
Apparently in their short term memory, that's only good enough for 4-5 in the West. I still think if the Big Three can stay healthy and Jefferson can improve upon his first season, the Spurs should be regarded just as dangerously this year as last. But they've never had a problem with flying under the radar.
As always, health's the biggest concern for the Spurs and it looks like the Big 3 might be the healthiest they've been in years since they all rested instead of playing internationally over the offseason. Unlike the Spurs rosters of past and the Lakers now, no one's recovering from surgery either which is another good thing for Spurs fans. Health alone should get them a higher seed than last year, knock on wood that they stay healthy throughout the season.
The Spurs seemed to have also upgraded from their terrible supporting cast so thats more reason to be optimistic of a high seed and many teams out West are either declining, starting out less healthy than the Spurs, or made significant roster changes and like RJ showed last year there's a great chance of growing pains for those ballclubs.
Seems like a better year for the Spurs than last.
analyzed
10-24-2010, 06:15 PM
I think this boils down to the fact that most (90 %) championship teams have an MVP candidate ( franchice player) . We have lost that with TD decline. While TP although good is not worthy of " franchice player" considerations. So max or close to max salary to keep him might not be justified. If your wondering why the Mavs are rated above us, I think it comes down to the fact ( franchice player go to guy) . they still have one in Dirk , so does LA (kobe) and OKC (Durant).
I do realize there are exceptions of not winning it all without a Franchice player such as Detriot in 04 and in the early 90's. but that's just it , it's the exception , so for us to win we really have to be an exception.
DesignatedT
10-24-2010, 06:22 PM
How about we play the season and then talk about this once we actually see the guys in action. key word in all this is "prediction". Nobody knows how were going to do this season and we should have a much better idea about this situation come all star break. Right now it's pretty pointless to argue about it.
If the Spurs can stay reasonably healthy ie; none of Tim, Tony or Manu miss more than 12 games each and no more than a handful all at once, I see no reason why they can't finish 2nd in the West.
I think any of Spurs, Mavs and Thunder could finish 2nd, depending on injuries. The Thunder had an absolutely amazing run with injuries last season, I think they will be a much better team than last season but could finish with a similar record if they just pick up a few minor injuries to even just one of their best players.
DeadlyDynasty
10-24-2010, 08:01 PM
The west is wide open from 2-7, so if SA remains healthy they're as good a bet as any to take the 2nd seed.
The west is wide open from 2-7, so if SA remains healthy they're as good a bet as any to take the 2nd seed.
Agreed.
I don't think the Spurs have a great ceiling without some big "if's", but they are as good as any team in the West other than the Lakers.
Nathan89
10-24-2010, 09:34 PM
I think this boils down to the fact that most (90 %) championship teams have an MVP candidate ( franchice player) . We have lost that with TD decline. While TP although good is not worthy of " franchice player" considerations. So max or close to max salary to keep him might not be justified. If your wondering why the Mavs are rated above us, I think it comes down to the fact ( franchice player go to guy) . they still have one in Dirk , so does LA (kobe) and OKC (Durant).
I do realize there are exceptions of not winning it all without a Franchice player such as Detriot in 04 and in the early 90's. but that's just it , it's the exception , so for us to win we really have to be an exception.
Who is the the MVP candidate on the celtics?
We have a chance if rj can hit the three and splitter can play tough defense.
analyzed
10-25-2010, 12:27 AM
Yup your right the celtics are another exception. but remember in the year that they did win a ring (2008) . KG was considered an MVP candidate. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying it's impossible to win without an MVP candidate, but I would say your chances are slim.
I agree outside of the LA, we have as good a chance as the rest of the West. But clearly LA and the Heat are a few notches ahead of us. This really wasn't the case when we won titles.
Who is the the MVP candidate on the celtics?
We have a chance if rj can hit the three and splitter can play tough defense.
TJastal
10-25-2010, 11:44 AM
Who is the the MVP candidate on the celtics?
We have a chance if rj can hit the three and splitter can play tough defense.
Rondo will be defenitely be in the mix for MVP considerations IMO.
Shifty
10-25-2010, 11:53 AM
Analysts are fickle in the first place. Only concerned with "what have you done for me lately". That's why I don't put much stock in these pre-season rankings.
When the Spurs added Jefferson and Dice last summer, all the analysts put us back at the top of the pile based on the fact that those two were coming off strong seasons with different teams, and the Spurs were only a season removed as defending champions from 2007.
Now, the Spurs have those same pieces (which were regarded as very good last summer), plus they've added some other good players (Splitter, Anderson) and lost some deadweight (Mason, Bogans). But all the analysts remember is Jefferson underachieving, and the Spurs getting swept by Phoenix.
Apparently in their short term memory, that's only good enough for 4-5 in the West. I still think if the Big Three can stay healthy and Jefferson can improve upon his first season, the Spurs should be regarded just as dangerously this year as last. But they've never had a problem with flying under the radar.
I agree with this. Although it can be seen as very optimistic. Last year we were a high regarded team even when Manu was coming from an injury plagued year. Now we have the same "new" pieces and added a few more and even when they are not that good, they do replace some very poor performers from last year.
wildbill2u
10-25-2010, 02:00 PM
Dallas Morning News assigned rating points to starting players at each position on each team in the West. For example Dirk was #1 Power forward with TD #3. SG had Kobe #1 with Manu #5. PG had Deron Williams #1 with Parker 5.
Under that system Lakers #1, Rockets #2 and Mavs. #3. We wound up tied for 4 with two teams (Warriors and Jazz).
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.