Reply With Quote
No love for them Raptors?
Interesting article on ESPN. Blazers actually got the most votes for contenders out of the 5 teams.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/...nder-pretender
Contenders or Pretenders:
Cavs (1C 4P) - I think they are pretenders. Still have issues with their defense, and Irving's hoggy ways. Trade Irving and Waiters for some rugged inside help (in the mold of a Noah, or fat Gasol), then get a guy like Brandon Knight to direct the offense a bit, play defense and shoot the corner three, and you have a contender. I don't think Love is a problem, he can work his way into an ideal side kick of Lebron, rebounding and making outlet passes. His defensive issues can be handled with a right partner.
Wiz (0C 5P) - Pretenders. I don't see anyway they can become a contender with this core. They are good players (Wall, Beal, Nene Gortat), but they are just that, good, but not good enough to be cores of a championship contender. Pierce is great (one of the most underrated wings in the last two decades), but he is way past his prime.
Blazers (3C 2P) - Pretenders. No bench, low volume chucking PG, lacks defensive system. the starting five is good, and they can be built into a contender, but a lot of work and development has to be done before we get there. I can't see them going past the Spurs, Memphis, healthy OKC, GSW, and the Clippers.
Rockets (1C 4P) - Pretenders. Tough matchup for anyone, but it's tough to see them get past all of Spurs, healthy OKC, Memphis, Clippers, Blazers, and GSW. Harden and D12 make a good core, but there are no third options, the bench is thin, and the coach is an idiot. The defensive potential on this team is phenomenal though. D12, Beverly and Ariza can really shut down a team if the right system is implemented.
Clippers (2C 3P) - Contenders. Yes, there are obviously holes, but the talent is there. CP3 is really underrated on this board (overrated else where), Griffin is very tough to stop, and Jordan, if he gets a magic pill to increase his basketball IQ, can be a great defensive anchor. However, there are no magic pills for Jordan, their wing defense is atrocious, and their bench is pitiful. That said, if they can somehow avoid the Spurs, healthy OKC (may not even have them in the playoffs this year), and play out of their minds against Memphis, I can see the Clippers winning it all.
No love for them Raptors?
Cavs- Contenders, simply because they're in the East..based on their actual team and flaws, no, they don't fit the criteria of a contender, but their compe ion is weak and their flaws probably won't be badly exposed against teams that are limited in talent
Bulls- Contenders, simply because they're in the East..same as Cavs
Wizards- Pretenders, Wall has already been exposed in the playoffs, they don't have any consistent and reliable offensive weapons
Raptors- Pretenders, DeRozan's game doesn't translate well to the playoffs, vanilla system, questionable frontcourt, questionable bench, they are the Raptors
Dallas- In the middle, a lot of huge flaws(no perimeter defense, no starting PG, questionable bench), but could get by on coaching and star power if they get the right matchup
Golden State- In the middle, notable flaws(best players are easy to shut down in the playoffs, Bogut's health, rookie coach), but could get by if their team gets hot and has the right matchups
Houston- Pretender, questionable depth + the Harden/McHale playoff combination
Clippers- Pretender, can't play Jordan in clutch time, atrocious perimeter defense and overall perimeter performance, 3rd option is Jamal Crawford
Memphis- Pretender, relying on Courtney Lee and ancient Vince Carter to carry their perimeter offense in the playoffs
OKC- Contender, if they get healthy and miraculously make it to the playoffs
Portland- Pretender, the ultimate pretender, just like last year..gimmicky system that doesn't work in the playoffs
And they say today's NBA is better
I agree with most of this. But I think Cavs are a contender. And will prove that by May. Probably wont ring but a contender
And they say today's NBA is betterteams with John Starks as the #2 option and Reggie Miller as a #1 as contenders..
Your turn lefty
Still beating most of those teams
As compared to a championship team with Kawhi as the #1 scoring option?
Maybe I suck at math, but 4th in PPG on the team in the playoffs = #1 scoring option? That doesn't really make any sense, tbh..
Only real contenders are SA, OKC (if they can make the playoffs and Durbeta/Westchimp are 100%), Chicago, and Cleveland. Everyone else is playing for nada imo. Rockets are gimmick team. Blazers are garbage. GSW is almost there but no team relying on Gay Thompson and chucker Curry are going to win a le. Cavs and Bulls by virtue of being in a conference are contenders. Spurs are gonna repeat tbh. Everyone else can suck a
spurs - contenders
everyone else - pretenders
FinalsMVP, #2 in PPG and by far the #1 FG% in the Finals. #3 in PPG in the regular season and the entire playoffs.
Having Parker as the #1 actually weakens your argument.
So what's you point? Those Pacers or Knicks teams would have beaten the Spurs, OKC and/or Miami?
He was #4 for the Spurs in PPG in the playoffs, stop moving the goalposts..
#3 in the regular season is fine, he's easily a legit #3 option, although Ginobili was obviously ahead of him as a scoring option, too..
John Starks wouldn't even start for the Spurs, he wouldn't even be their 6th man, let alone the #1 perimeter option on the team
And using the Spurs as a comparison is pretty stupid regardless, they're literally the most unique team in NBA history..the other contenders were led by Lebron/Wade/Bosh, Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka and Paul/Griffin, all superstar players minus Ibaka, who would be the 2nd best player on most of those 90s "contenders"
Look at the team leaders of some of the legit contenders in the 90s:
John Starks
Toni Kukoc as a #2 guy on a contender
Reggie Miller and Rik ing Smits as the best players on a team that was supposed to be DK's biggest challenge
Otis Thorpe as the 2nd best player of a le team
This is serious damage being wreaked by HH. Obviously the legends of the NBA would still compete today, but some of the players of the past had giant, gaping holes in their games that would be so exploited today it would be silly to see them on the court.
He was #4 for the Spurs in PPG in the playoffs, stop moving the goalposts..
#3 in the regular season is fine, he's easily a legit #3 option, although Ginobili was obviously ahead of him as a scoring option, too..
John Starks wouldn't even start for the Spurs, he wouldn't even be their 6th man, let alone the #1 perimeter option on the team
And using the Spurs as a comparison is pretty stupid regardless, they're literally the most unique team in NBA history..the other contenders were led by Lebron/Wade/Bosh, Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka and Paul/Griffin, all superstar players minus Ibaka, who would be the 2nd best player on most of those 90s "contenders"
Look at the team leaders of some of the legit contenders in the 90s:
John Starks
Toni Kukoc as a #2 guy on a contender
Reggie Miller and Rik ing Smits as the best players on a team that was supposed to be DK's biggest challenge
Otis Thorpe as the 2nd best player of a le team
There is a reason that the NBA is shifting toward hybrid SFs like Kawhi and James. Because they're hyper-athletes who can jump out of the gym, yet still have considerably decent handles and yet manage to outrun most players down the court.
Kawhi Leonard or James in the 1970s or 80s would have been absolutely unstoppable, especially on defense since no one knew how to play D back then beyond giving the occasional "hard foul".
No, that a comparatively weak #1 or #2 option doesn't mean that the team is bad.
They played 5 games in the finals, he finished #2 in ppg.
Tied for #3. 2 points less in 23 games is a rounding error.
How do you figure Ginobili is ahead of him as a scoring option despite less PPG?
He would be the #1 perimeter scoring option for a team like the Clippers though, which is a contender like the Knicks were a contender.John Starks wouldn't even start for the Spurs, he wouldn't even be their 6th man, let alone the #1 perimeter option on the team
As opposed to using the Knicks and Pacers when the other teams in the era had:And using the Spurs as a comparison is pretty stupid regardless, they're literally the most unique team in NBA history..the other contenders were led by Lebron/Wade/Bosh, Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka and Paul/Griffin, all superstar players minus Ibaka, who would be the 2nd best player on most of those 90s "contenders"
Malone/Stockton/Hornacek
Kemp/Payton/Schremph
Barkley/Johnson/Marjele
Hakeem/Clyde
Jordan/Pippen
Or ignoring teams like: George/Hibbert/Hill, Lillard/Aldridge, Randolph/Gasol, Noah/?, Lowry/Derozan
What's wrong with a 19ppg player who played for a defensive oriented contender (like the Pacers a couple of years ago, or even last year) that ranked 16th out of 27th team in ORtg?Look at the team leaders of some of the legit contenders in the 90s:
John Starks
Vs. George and Hibbert as Lebron's biggest challenge in the East? How about Noah/?Toni Kukoc as a #2 guy on a contender
Reggie Miller and Rik ing Smits as the best players on a team that was supposed to be DK's biggest challenge
And who was the 2nd best player on last year's le team?
What about the 11 Mavs? Was it a 37 year old Kidd, or was it Marion?
And we are assuming those players would have the same advancements to the game over the last 30 years when they were transported back in time?
Was it a gene mutation that allowed players to suddenly learn how to play defense the last little while?
What allowed players today to be so much bigger stronger and faster than those of yesteryears? Another gene mutation? Have we sped up the evolutionary cycle?
Contenders: (in order)
1. Spurs
2. Bulls
3. Cavs
4. Mavs
5. GSW
No one else is worth discussing. Blazers and Rox would be next but I cant see either getting past 2nd round. OKC of course could get get in at 8 and be very dangerous but hard to win a le from there was Hakeem's Rox the only one to
do so? I forget what seed they got it might have been 5 or 6 ...
Pretty much this. I wouldn't write off LAC yet.
This isn't an assumption of relative player skill. Just how they played back then. The game has evolved and the players with it. Effort on defense alone since the Jordan era is leagues beyond anything that came before.
Amb going ham
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
